GrogHeads Forum

Digital Gaming => Computer Gaming => Topic started by: Ian C on May 13, 2016, 12:07:15 PM

Title: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 13, 2016, 12:07:15 PM
I'm getting excited:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hearts-of-iron-iv-development-diary-56-bits-pieces.930457/


I'm really looking forward to this release...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 13, 2016, 12:20:53 PM
Last time I looked forward to any game with this much excitement and anticipation -- HoI3 in 2009 
(Maybe not the best precedent -- but I'm convinced Pdox won't repeat the debacle of the HoI3 launch)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 13, 2016, 12:24:53 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Kushan on May 13, 2016, 12:58:45 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)

Don't listen to the idiots claiming Stellaris is another HoI 3. Sure, some of the mechanics might not make people happy but its hardly the bug filled mess HoI 3 was on release. The stutter bug that many had on day one was hot fixed within 24 hours of release.

I've never played an of the HoI games, and despite my lack of interest in yet another WW2 game, I'm really looking forward to HoI IV. I went back read some of the older dev diaries, but a lot of those are from last year and I'm not sure how current those mechanics are now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on May 13, 2016, 01:08:47 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)

Don't listen to the idiots claiming Stellaris is another HoI 3. Sure, some of the mechanics might not make people happy but its hardly the bug filled mess HoI 3 was on release. The stutter bug that many had on day one was hot fixed within 24 hours of release.

I've never played an of the HoI games, and despite my lack of interest in yet another WW2 game, I'm really looking forward to HoI IV. I went back read some of the older dev diaries, but a lot of those are from last year and I'm not sure how current those mechanics are now.

Nobody in the GH Stellaris thread is claiming it is another HOI3 in terms of bugs. Only that the current state of the game is a big let down from initial expectations and prerelease hype. Careful who you call an idiot around here.  :crazy2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on May 13, 2016, 01:53:41 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)

Don't listen to the idiots claiming Stellaris is another HoI 3. Sure, some of the mechanics might not make people happy but its hardly the bug filled mess HoI 3 was on release. The stutter bug that many had on day one was hot fixed within 24 hours of release.

I've never played an of the HoI games, and despite my lack of interest in yet another WW2 game, I'm really looking forward to HoI IV. I went back read some of the older dev diaries, but a lot of those are from last year and I'm not sure how current those mechanics are now.

Nobody in the GH Stellaris thread is claiming it is another HOI3 in terms of bugs. Only that the current state of the game is a big let down from initial expectations and prerelease hype. Careful who you call an idiot around here.  :crazy2:

I agree with JH....the disappointment being posted with Stellaris is a direct measure of the prerelease hype and resulting very high expectations. I'm not saying there will or won't be disappointment with HoI4...but the prerelease hype and expectations are very similar to those first posted in the Stellaris thread.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 13, 2016, 02:04:17 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)

Don't listen to the idiots claiming Stellaris is another HoI 3. Sure, some of the mechanics might not make people happy but its hardly the bug filled mess HoI 3 was on release. The stutter bug that many had on day one was hot fixed within 24 hours of release.

I've never played an of the HoI games, and despite my lack of interest in yet another WW2 game, I'm really looking forward to HoI IV. I went back read some of the older dev diaries, but a lot of those are from last year and I'm not sure how current those mechanics are now.

Nobody in the GH Stellaris thread is claiming it is another HOI3 in terms of bugs. Only that the current state of the game is a big let down from initial expectations and prerelease hype. Careful who you call an idiot around here.  :crazy2:

I agree with JH....the disappointment being posted with Stellaris is a direct measure of the prerelease hype and resulting very high expectations. I'm not saying there will or won't be disappointment with HoI4...but the prerelease hype and expectations are very similar to those first posted in the Stellaris thread.

One more thought, Stellaris is a complete departure from anything that Paradox has done before.  HOI4 isn't just their fourth try on WWII, but is more in line with the type of games they're traditionally done. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on May 13, 2016, 02:06:03 PM
Wait, go read the Stellaris thread first...  ::)

Don't listen to the idiots claiming Stellaris is another HoI 3. Sure, some of the mechanics might not make people happy but its hardly the bug filled mess HoI 3 was on release. The stutter bug that many had on day one was hot fixed within 24 hours of release.

I've never played an of the HoI games, and despite my lack of interest in yet another WW2 game, I'm really looking forward to HoI IV. I went back read some of the older dev diaries, but a lot of those are from last year and I'm not sure how current those mechanics are now.

Nobody in the GH Stellaris thread is claiming it is another HOI3 in terms of bugs. Only that the current state of the game is a big let down from initial expectations and prerelease hype. Careful who you call an idiot around here.  :crazy2:

I agree with JH....the disappointment being posted with Stellaris is a direct measure of the prerelease hype and resulting very high expectations. I'm not saying there will or won't be disappointment with HoI4...but the prerelease hype and expectations are very similar to those first posted in the Stellaris thread.

One more thought, Stellaris is a complete departure from anything that Paradox has done before.  HOI4 isn't just their fourth try on WWII, but is more in line with the type of games they're traditionally done.

Not to mention, its probably a totally different development team, since the titles were obviously undergoing joint development. I'm definitely hyped for HOI IV.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on May 13, 2016, 02:37:17 PM

[/quote]

One more thought, Stellaris is a complete departure from anything that Paradox has done before.  HOI4 isn't just their fourth try on WWII, but is more in line with the type of games they're traditionally done.
[/quote]

But the 1st 3 tries don't give me a lot of optimism.  After tremendous excitement over the first two iterations, I never even bought HOI 3 (even though its $10 at GOG right now).

When HOI 4 comes out, the first place I'll look to in the reviews is naval war, especially aircraft carriers.  I don't rule out buying it just for the land war if it's really all that and a bag of chips, but as a guy whose first interest in a WW2 sim is playing as the US, HOI has never floated my boat.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 13, 2016, 02:43:22 PM
I have no doubt that when HoI4 launches, there will be problems with certain mechanics, some of which people on the Pdox forums will lose their heads over, combined with the inevitable whinging about "why was X left out?" and "Y is modeled completely ahistorically!).

None of that will faze me. True I'm not quite as impressed with Stellaris as I thought I would be, though I still think it's an excellent game that will only improve over time. But HoI4 is going to change the landscape of ww2 strategy gaming. I really think it's going to be revolutionary, and the best in the HoI series.

Pollyanna-ish maybe, but I'm a true believer when it comes to this game.  :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 13, 2016, 02:50:32 PM
And June 6 is almost here!!!  :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 13, 2016, 02:57:58 PM
Anyone remember the 'demo' for HOI 3 they released? They released the full game by mistake. That was a hoot.

I think the quality of games upon release has improved over the past couple of years following some notable fiascos. It seems that Quality Assurance has become a prerequisite fairly recently. Maybe because companies now realise that gamers don't take crap and also how harmful bad reviews can be.

It seems recent negativity is more like "I didn't expect the game to be like this" rather than "this is broken".



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 13, 2016, 03:11:56 PM
I agree with that Ian.  The whole design decisions will never make everyone happy, so those will always be an issue.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on May 13, 2016, 03:14:00 PM
Judging by the YouTube videos released by the developers that demonstrate gameplay, we have a lot to be excited about. It looks like many of the complex game elements from HOI 3 have been refined and recast into mutually exclusive trees. This is a good idea. They also want to put a focus on letting the AI manage your armies. Not sure if that will work, but I welcome the effort. Designing units seems to be more fleshed out in this version, including designing your own vehicles. I also greatly like how they graphically show the frontlines and the ability to create plans with arrows that represent objectives to be captured.

I can promise you, there is no illusion of depth here- this game will be complicated even with all the streamlining. It looks like the unit hierarchy is mostly gone and I honestly don't mind that even though I really enjoyed aspects of it. Organizing units into theaters should be enough detail for me. Having said all those good things, I believe it will be buggy on release. They always are and I have no reason to think otherwise this time. One thing I truly hope they fix from HOI3 is how replacements instantly reach the front, rendering wars a battle of manpower pools.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 13, 2016, 04:04:52 PM
It is another insta-buy for me.  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 13, 2016, 04:19:17 PM
Anyone remember the 'demo' for HOI 3 they released? They released the full game by mistake. That was a hoot.

Really? That's hilarious. I don't remember it at all. Possibly because HoI3 was one of the last games I bought as a physical DVD -- hadn't yet drunk the Steam kool-aid.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 13, 2016, 04:47:25 PM
Anyone remember the 'demo' for HOI 3 they released? They released the full game by mistake. That was a hoot.

Really? That's hilarious. I don't remember it at all. Possibly because HoI3 was one of the last games I bought as a physical DVD -- hadn't yet drunk the Steam kool-aid.


As I recall, it was up and down within the day.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on May 13, 2016, 04:51:13 PM
HoI3 worked well (after all the patches/DLC's) on continental battles like Europe and Russia. It never worked for me in the Pacific with its island hopping and naval battles. I hope they can fix this aspect of the war.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 10:17:40 AM
Preorder is up.  $39.99 , like Stellaris -- with higher tiers offering more goodies:

http://store.steampowered.com/app/394360/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/394360/)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 17, 2016, 10:17:58 AM
Preorder is available!!!

Three editions priced at $39.99, $49.99, and $69.99!!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 17, 2016, 10:20:41 AM
Beat by Sandman.

Paradox's pre order site is down do to traffic.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 10:21:34 AM
Beat by Sandman.

Have I mentioned how excited I am for this game?   ;)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 17, 2016, 10:24:06 AM
If you get the high level edition, Field Marshall, this is included. 

Quote
Expansion Pass #1:
Includes the first 2 expansion and itís related content, to an estimated value of $49.99.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on May 17, 2016, 10:57:04 AM
Heard that Pacific Theater AI will be available as a DLC  >:D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 11:23:02 AM
Dan Lind (head dev) indicated early on that they were aware of the major shortcomings in how HoI3 handled the Pacific war, and amphibious warfare in general. Remains to be seen if HoI4 can pull off something that reasonably resembles the Pacific war -- something no HoI game has yet accomplished. I have hope that HoI4 will at least be an improvement over what we've gotten in the past. We'll see.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 17, 2016, 12:06:54 PM
It was always my intention to buy HoI4 straight away, but it's too close to the release of Stellaris.  I wouldn't play it for ages, so I may as well wait for the first round of patches.

Eagerly awaiting impressions though!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: steve58 on May 17, 2016, 12:37:09 PM
Seen on the Steam HOI4 forums:

Quote
Get 25% off on GMG

Use voucher code: IRON25


Works on all editions, for how many copies you want!

http://steamcommunity.com/app/394360/discussions/0/364041776199233711/

Not tried it since I'm going to wait on this one...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on May 17, 2016, 12:46:07 PM
Waiting here too.

Too many times buying a new game, only to have it a buggy POS.

I've never played any of the HoI series, so this will be a huge leap for me.

I've read that for a HoI newbie it's best to start off playing the game as a smaller nation.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 01:24:18 PM
I've read that for a HoI newbie it's best to start off playing the game as a smaller nation.

I don't agree with this at all. Play a major nation. That's how to learn the game. A nation that is certain to have a key role in the war. I've never understood the attraction of playing as, say, Ireland or something. (I have nothing against Ireland, mind you. But safe to say it did not play any decisive role in WW2...)

Maybe avoid a major that has huge commitments in both land and sea warfare.  Frankly, Germany is a good nation to start with.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on May 17, 2016, 01:24:40 PM
Waiting here too.

Too many times buying a new game, only to have it a buggy POS.

I've never played any of the HoI series, so this will be a huge leap for me.

I've read that for a HoI newbie it's best to start off playing the game as a smaller nation.
They also have smaller set-piece scenarios like the Bulge or North Africa, which are good to get a feel for the combat side of the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on May 17, 2016, 01:48:49 PM
Waiting too...I just really started getting into HoI3 this year so I can wait until they at least get the initial bugs stomped out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: kludger on May 17, 2016, 01:55:55 PM
I will pick up a preorder key if we see the cheap $26 preorder keys available for HOI4 like we did Stellaris before they then went up in price.

I was never able to overcome the complexity of HOI3 so am hoping HOI4 will be more approachable to newbies/idiots like me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 17, 2016, 02:05:40 PM
Apparently Greenmangaming are doing a similar deal.  I don't know the details though.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on May 17, 2016, 02:05:52 PM
I will pick up a preorder key if we see the cheap $26 preorder keys available for HOI4 like we did Stellaris before they then went up in price.

I was never able to overcome the complexity of HOI3 so am hoping HOI4 will be more approachable to newbies/idiots like me.

You CAN overcome it. I did, and I also thought it was insurmountable. I have a thread around here somewhere about the odyssey.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on May 17, 2016, 02:07:10 PM
I will pick up a preorder key if we see the cheap $26 preorder keys available for HOI4 like we did Stellaris before they then went up in price.

I was never able to overcome the complexity of HOI3 so am hoping HOI4 will be more approachable to newbies/idiots like me.

You CAN overcome it. I did, and I also thought it was insurmountable. I have a thread around here somewhere about the odyssey.

Agreed, I would load up HoI3, start a game and then just stare at the screen for a half hour before quitting cause I didn't know where to start. Marco Antonio's you tube channel is about 60% hoi3 stuff, I pretty much learned the game watching his videos. Note that English is not his first language and he can sound bored at times in his videos but he knows the game and systems unlike anyone I have seen
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 02:30:01 PM
Honestly, unless you're super invested in mods like the Black ICE that really transform HoI3 (making it even more complex) -- I would just skip HOI3 at this point. HOI4 is going to feel like another universe.

My sense is -- the aftermath of HOI3 was a huge turning point for Pdox. I really think they did a 180-degree turn and resolved never to make the same mistakes again. Just look at HOI3, and then boot up the game they created after it, Crusader Kings II. It's almost like the games are made by different studios. And I think there can be no doubt that Pdox made the right decision. Continuing down the path of HOI3 -- lousy UI, horrific map, confusing mechanics and game concepts -- might have been fatal for the company.

HOI4 is going to be complex, no question. But I'm not sure investing time in HOI3 will in any significant way prepare you for the experience of what the new game is going to offer. The difference is going to be stark -- almost as stark as the difference between Crusader Kings I and CKII.

Just my $0.02.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 17, 2016, 03:19:53 PM
Bought! Now where's Vicky 3?  :smitten:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 17, 2016, 03:29:34 PM
I will pick up a preorder key if we see the cheap $26 preorder keys available for HOI4 like we did Stellaris before they then went up in price.

I was never able to overcome the complexity of HOI3 so am hoping HOI4 will be more approachable to newbies/idiots like me.

You CAN overcome it. I did, and I also thought it was insurmountable. I have a thread around here somewhere about the odyssey.

I agree.  I did the same.  I forced myself to sit down over a weekend and learn to play.  It was frustrating in the beginning and I had to start over a few times due to some mistakes I'd made, but then things started to click and I became more engrossed in what was happening on screen than I ever have in any other grand strategy or 4X game.  I started with France.  My thread on it is also buried around here somewhere.

As for the change in direction after HOI3, I didn't pick up HOI3 until very late in the dev cycle (after Their Finest Hour was released) so I didn't experience the issues others have pointed out.  Other than the weird Pacific War AI (well the USA AI in general), I don't have any major issues with the game.  I love it.   Conversely, I seem to be in the minority when it comes to CKII.  I thoroughly enjoyed reading some of the fantastic AARs written here and bought the game hoping to recreate the experiences others were having.  For whatever reason, the game just does not do it for me.  I keep buying the damned DLC thinking this is the missing piece but after 5-6 hours of play, I'm bored to tears and I shelve it again.

I want HOI4 to be great but I'm concerned they're going in the wrong direction.  If what I've read about teleporting bombers is true, that's a game breaker for me.  I'm hugely interested in the strategic bombing campaigns of the RAF and USAAF so if they've abstracted it too much, I would not be pleased.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: GeneralHawk on May 17, 2016, 03:48:48 PM
+1 robot.  I love 3 with black ice and I am very concerned with some of the changes (simplification) they have out in place for 4. Over on the paradox forums there are battles raging over this issue.  For example they have removed fuel and oil is all encompassing but it doesn't impact units so that you can still produce and use armored/mech/motor units even if you have zero oil...that's just tip of the iceberg from what I gathered in some quick reading...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 17, 2016, 04:07:28 PM
Guys, and again just my 2 cents, but I think all the hue and cry over HOI4 'dumbing down' the franchise are seriously overblown. This is not going to be an 'oversimplified' version of HOI.

I was as disappointed as anyone when it became clear that the OOB/CnC structure from HOI3 was getting ditched in 4. But overall I understand why they made the decision (essentially for the purpose of having a more competent AI). Although it's not what I would have preferred, I can live with this.

I've followed HOI4's development since the day it was announced (...over 2 years ago...) and I think if you look closely at the content of the Dev Diaries, it's pretty clear that HOI4 is going to have a highly sophisticated industrial / production model -- definitely an advancement over HOI3. I think the Battle Planner has the potential to be completely transformative for strategic / operational-level WW2 strategy games.

I loved HOI3 and put more hours into it than I can account for. With the expansions it became a great game -- a great but also very imperfect game, I think. There was so much room in a sequel to improve and streamline almost every dimension of the game. It's a tall order, but I think HOI4 is going to deliver on that.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 17, 2016, 04:19:59 PM
I guess it depends on what you're looking for out of the game.  I want on that focuses more granularity on the prosecution of the war, not less.  I want the OOB.  I want to micro my bomber raids.  If the had to abstract and streamline things, I'd have preferred to have them do it to the production side of things.  If I want to delve into that aspect, I can just play Making History.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 17, 2016, 04:43:53 PM
Interesting decision.....no brainer to purchase, but do I go full throttle and buy the Field Marshall version for $67?  Or just settle for a lesser version and pick up DLC/expansions later when they are dirt cheap during sales?  Such a decision....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: kludger on May 18, 2016, 12:09:56 AM
I will pick up a preorder key if we see the cheap $26 preorder keys available for HOI4 like we did Stellaris before they then went up in price.

I was never able to overcome the complexity of HOI3 so am hoping HOI4 will be more approachable to newbies/idiots like me.

You CAN overcome it. I did, and I also thought it was insurmountable. I have a thread around here somewhere about the odyssey.

Thanks for the input guys, maybe I will try watching some HOI3 playthroughs and revisit it if nothing else as prep for HOI4, maybe I will get over the initial hurdle this time.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 18, 2016, 02:29:48 AM
Here's the link to my thread detailing my learning experience/AAR playing France.  There are some links in there that will hopefully prove helpful in learning the game.

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6659.0 (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6659.0)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: kludger on May 18, 2016, 02:36:11 AM
Apparently Greenmangaming are doing a similar deal.  I don't know the details though.
Yes you're right Huw, looks like GMG has it now for 25% off with code IRON25 (USD$29.99), and imperialgames too (USD$28.99) for the Cadet version. Pre-ordered from the latter and got the key immediately which activated on Steam already.

Looking forward to it.

And thanks for the link Robot, will definitely check it out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 18, 2016, 03:03:12 AM
+1 robot.  I love 3 with black ice and I am very concerned with some of the changes (simplification) they have out in place for 4. Over on the paradox forums there are battles raging over this issue.  For example they have removed fuel and oil is all encompassing but it doesn't impact units so that you can still produce and use armored/mech/motor units even if you have zero oil...that's just tip of the iceberg from what I gathered in some quick reading...

Paradox have said this in regards to Oil:

Quote
So this means that the abstract "supply" of HOI3 is now instead requests for specific equipment instead which fits a lot better in with HOI4's equipment and production focus. This also means that there is no separate fuel need as such in the game, this instead is included in production of replacement equipment which need Oil (all tanks, trucks etc). Before everyone chokes on their friday beer give this some thought. Being able to stockpile fuel generally leads to the same problems as all other kinds of stockpiling when it comes to hindsight, so by wrapping it into the actual production of equipment requests to units (also nobody would request a tank without diesel to run it, and if they did it wouldn't really be usable as a tank) everything clicks into place and player doesn't have to micro manage all movement, airplane rebasing etc to try to avoid fuel waste and focus on making sure they have access to a strategic Oil resource and replacement equipment and a clear path for units to be supplied.


So, if I understand correctly:

For fuel-burning units to be refuelled, their nation needs access to:
1. A Strategic Oil Resource
2. Be able to trace clear path for replacement supply (fuel is abstracted inside this)


Full dev diary on Supply here:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hearts-of-iron-iv-33rd-development-diary-supply.891122/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on May 18, 2016, 03:05:13 AM
Paradox team playing as France https://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/v/66977769

(don't know how long this is available, might be replaced after the next broadcast)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on May 18, 2016, 04:00:19 AM
+1 robot.  I love 3 with black ice and I am very concerned with some of the changes (simplification) they have out in place for 4. Over on the paradox forums there are battles raging over this issue.  For example they have removed fuel and oil is all encompassing but it doesn't impact units so that you can still produce and use armored/mech/motor units even if you have zero oil...that's just tip of the iceberg from what I gathered in some quick reading...

Paradox have said this in regards to Oil:

Quote
So this means that the abstract "supply" of HOI3 is now instead requests for specific equipment instead which fits a lot better in with HOI4's equipment and production focus. This also means that there is no separate fuel need as such in the game, this instead is included in production of replacement equipment which need Oil (all tanks, trucks etc). Before everyone chokes on their friday beer give this some thought. Being able to stockpile fuel generally leads to the same problems as all other kinds of stockpiling when it comes to hindsight, so by wrapping it into the actual production of equipment requests to units (also nobody would request a tank without diesel to run it, and if they did it wouldn't really be usable as a tank) everything clicks into place and player doesn't have to micro manage all movement, airplane rebasing etc to try to avoid fuel waste and focus on making sure they have access to a strategic Oil resource and replacement equipment and a clear path for units to be supplied.


So, if I understand correctly:

For fuel-burning units to be refuelled, their nation needs access to:
1. A Strategic Oil Resource
2. Be able to trace clear path for replacement supply (fuel is abstracted inside this)


Full dev diary on Supply here:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hearts-of-iron-iv-33rd-development-diary-supply.891122/
Mixed feeling for me. Love that it's getting simpler but quite sad at the same time due to loss of detail.  How would that affect Japan's oil problem where they need to move around oil from Boreneo as done in WITP?  Will it break the Pacific War? Or it's now more about stationing convoys and escorts on sea areas.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on May 18, 2016, 05:09:18 AM
just bought colonel edition $36.07 (£25)

https://www.imperialgames.com/kb/1025/39592/hearts-of-iron-iv-colonel-edition
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 18, 2016, 05:34:28 AM
Mixed feeling for me. Love that it's getting simpler but quite sad at the same time due to loss of detail.  How would that affect Japan's oil problem where they need to move around oil from Boreneo as done in WITP?  Will it break the Pacific War?

I agree and also have the same concerns.

Paradox forums have always had a continuing vein of sentiment that fans want more realism, more historical details. Mr Wester says on their video "we make hardcore games for a demanding audience". I'm not sure whether everyone will agree with that. Seems that a huge hardcore audience demanded NATO map counters and got told to shut up.
Putting all that detail into making battle plans workable and having the proper map symbols for fronts just like WW2 historical maps is wonderful, but the NATO symbols in the game are not square counters but little modern-style rectangular tokens with health bars on them. It's a bit like everyone going to a WW2 recreation event dressed in full national military kit but wearing a pair of hi-tech NIKE running shoes.

It's an old peeve but I wanted to get that off my chest. Buying the game, going to enjoy it. I'm certain that someone will mod counters in.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on May 18, 2016, 06:03:43 AM
Lately I'm having a fun time playing Supreme Ruler 2020. A flawed game but I love the details on the economy, variety of military units, unit designs, and logistics.

Regarding NATO map counters. Were they actually used in WW2 given that NATO was not around?
Of course the west its predecessor but Germans and Russians used a different set of esoteric symbols.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 18, 2016, 06:03:54 AM
I think the supply/fuel system is a marked improvement, actually.

In HOI3, it was simple (esp. if you start in 1936) to stockpile essentially unlimited oil, fuel and all the needed resources if you were playing as one of the major powers. Plus there was a hard cap at 999,999 (IIRC) which, of course, was in no way any more 'realistic' than the new system being implemented in HOI4. It was a simple system to 'game,' and indeed the game pushed you in that direction anyway -- stockpile max everything, which was entirely possible to do by the time war broke out.

I think the new system will actually be more challenging for the player. You need to secure the source of your oil. Lose it at any point, and you're in serious trouble. I can easily see this being more of a concern for the player, and a less easy system to game, than HOI3.

Plus, the supply system in HOI3 was a shambles. HOI4 can only make that better.

In all the countless hours I've played HOI3, I never faced anything like a serious shortage of fuel, oil etc., again, playing as any of the 5 major powers. Playing with Black ICE was another matter, although even there the only serious shortage I faced playing as Germany was in manpower once the war with USSR got going in earnest.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on May 18, 2016, 06:10:11 AM
No experience with Hoi 3 (have it but have not touched it). but it seems that the solution they picked was an easy way out. Meaning it's simple and did the job but they could have been more creative with more detail. But a nightmare to implement I guess.

Anyway, I'll see how it goes.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 18, 2016, 06:34:02 AM
I'm pretty excited about this one  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on May 18, 2016, 06:50:27 AM
Regarding NATO map counters. Were they actually used in WW2 given that NATO was not around?

I believe the system goes back to a US system from WWI.  It was certainly in use by the US in WWII.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 18, 2016, 07:03:16 AM
That's brought up from time to time (with other games) and my view is this....so?  :D

Seriously though - I understand those counters. I know what they mean. I couldn't really care less if they weren't in use in 1942. I'm playing a game in 2016  ;D

All I know is they're better than those sprites.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 18, 2016, 07:25:27 AM

Regarding NATO map counters. Were they actually used in WW2 given that NATO was not around?



The point I'm making is that it would be awesome to recreate those maps we are familiar with from historical articles and books, in the game. HOI 4 actually has mostly everything below except the divisional symbols. It's not a big deal to me, but is to many.


(http://www.emersonkent.com/images/wwii_west_1940.jpg)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on May 18, 2016, 07:48:06 AM
Lately I'm having a fun time playing Supreme Ruler 2020. A flawed game but I love the details on the economy, variety of military units, unit designs, and logistics.


You should really be playing Supreme Ruler Ultimate. It is the pinnacle of the series and combines pretty much everything from each prior game in the series. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 18, 2016, 08:13:10 AM
The point I'm making is that it would be awesome to recreate those maps we are familiar with from historical articles and books, in the game. HOI 4 actually has mostly everything below except the divisional symbols.

This is *exactly* why I'm so excited about HOI4's Battle Planner feature. I think it's the closest thing in PC games to recreating those operational-type maps you posted. In HoI3 you could draw up maps like that but they were just window-dressing. The idea of integrating those maps into the gameplay itself is, to me, extremely exciting.

I'm not worried about the counters issue at all. It will be one of the first things people mod, and there will soon be dozens of counter mods you'll be able to choose from. This game (like Pdox titles previous) is going to spawn a million mods.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on May 18, 2016, 08:30:11 AM
^ I figure Paradox will release countless Sprite Pack DLC for those who don't like NATO counters to purchase.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on May 18, 2016, 08:41:48 AM
[This is *exactly* why I'm so excited about HOI4's Battle Planner feature.

I hope they can pull it off.  They used this feature in the stream a couple of weeks ago but I still noticed a lot of manual interventions by the player (starts around min. 20).

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 18, 2016, 09:29:29 AM
Mr Wester says on their video "we make hardcore games for a demanding audience". I'm not sure whether everyone will agree with that.

Oh, come on.  You aren't seeing the wood for the trees.  Do you really think that changing the way oil production and supply works is opening the game up to the great unwashed?  I'm sure all the console gamers will descend on it now!

I get that grogs will want things to be done in different ways, but this is all still pretty damn hardcore.  HoI4 is most definitely still a niche title.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 18, 2016, 09:50:00 AM
Couldn't agree more, Huw. I find it hard to understand why the "Pdox is dumbing HOI down!" narrative has such traction. Look at the 60-70-odd Dev Diaries!

Not saying everyone has to agree 100% with the changes that HOI4 is bringing -- I certainly don't. But to say that HOI4 is going to be Hearts of Iron Simplified, a step backward for the series -- I just don't see it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Kushan on May 18, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
People said that Paradox dumbed down EUIV before release too but personally I don't think that's the case.

Not sure what version I'm going to preorder yet. Knowing me it will be the top one. I just can't resist when developers start showing me shiney extra stuff.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Philippe on May 18, 2016, 10:26:45 AM
Can strategic bombers still fly across Europe without getting intercepted, or did that get fixed?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 18, 2016, 10:49:59 AM
Mr Wester says on their video "we make hardcore games for a demanding audience". I'm not sure whether everyone will agree with that.

Oh, come on.  You aren't seeing the wood for the trees.  Do you really think that changing the way oil production and supply works is opening the game up to the great unwashed?  I'm sure all the console gamers will descend on it now!

I get that grogs will want things to be done in different ways, but this is all still pretty damn hardcore.  HoI4 is most definitely still a niche title.


Yes, but I like to beef about one thing or the other. It's a prerequisite to middle age.  :crazy2:

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 18, 2016, 11:07:27 AM
Can strategic bombers still fly across Europe without getting intercepted, or did that get fixed?

Pretty sure it's a feature, not a bug, so not getting changed, as far as I know --
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on May 18, 2016, 11:22:23 AM
Pre-ordered the colonel edition, kept Stellaris in wishlist for later...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 18, 2016, 11:54:48 AM
Well, I just bought from Kinguin for £21. I was going to get it...of course I was.

I may not play it right away anyway, so if it needs some bedding in time, it's cool.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 18, 2016, 01:24:21 PM
I've idly been watching some HOI4 footage from the "World War Wednesdays" series on YouTube and man, I feel like a 5 year old waiting for Christmas. I want to get my hands on this so badly... It looks completely amazing.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 18, 2016, 01:49:52 PM
I could get used to Paradox releasing a game every month! :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 18, 2016, 04:29:38 PM
I've idly been watching some HOI4 footage from the "World War Wednesdays" series on YouTube and man, I feel like a 5 year old waiting for Christmas. I want to get my hands on this so badly... It looks completely amazing.

I feel the same. All joking about counters aside, I can't wait. I really do have that 'waiting for Xmas' feeling I had as a kid. That's no bad thing.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on May 18, 2016, 04:59:21 PM
Lately I'm having a fun time playing Supreme Ruler 2020. A flawed game but I love the details on the economy, variety of military units, unit designs, and logistics.


You should really be playing Supreme Ruler Ultimate. It is the pinnacle of the series and combines pretty much everything from each prior game in the series.

Yup. Playing SR2020 scenario from Ultimate. I still call it 2020 because of the setting as you also have 1939 and Cold War in the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on May 18, 2016, 05:04:08 PM
I've been watching some of those 'War on Wednesday's' vids myself and can't wait for this game.  At least Stellaris and Polaris Sector have been keeping me pretty busy in the meanwhile. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on May 19, 2016, 06:26:23 AM
Am I the only one watching these videos and getting totally turned off by them.  Hungary taking over all of Eastern Europe, and becoming a big unstoppable blob.  Is this the typical BS where if you take over a country and you get  all its population and industry without penalty?  Cant wait to see the first person who takes over the entire world with Paraguay !!!!    Seriously, it's this type of shit that is not even realistically plausible, that has turned me off from all the games in the Hearts of Iron Series. 



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on May 19, 2016, 06:29:43 AM
Am I the only one watching these videos and getting totally turned off by them.  Hungary taking over all of Eastern Europe, and becoming a big unstoppable blob.  Is this the typical BS where if you take over a country and you get  all its population and industry without penalty?  Cant wait to see the first person who takes over the entire world with Paraguay !!!!    Seriously, it's this type of shit that is not even realistically plausible, that has turned me off from all the games in the Hearts of Iron Series. 



Dont think so, they mentioned the risks and it was a large infantry based attack.  an intervention by a major power and Hungarian empire would be doomed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on May 19, 2016, 07:08:55 AM
Ya Hungary conquering half of Germany, Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Austria, and whoever I forgot from the video, could totally happen !!!  ( Go to the 1 hour mark)   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on May 19, 2016, 07:23:29 AM
Ya Hungary conquering half of Germany, Poland, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Austria, and whoever I forgot from the video, could totally happen !!!  ( Go to the 1 hour mark)

They didnt have any Germany so had just taken on weaker nations so far.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on May 19, 2016, 07:54:21 AM
I never understood the concept of wanting to play a game to experience something exactly the way it happened historically.

What if Poland moved first...what if France extended the maginot line through the low counties or at least their borders with them.

I like historical contexts but to me playing a historical strategic game is seeing what else could have happened
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 19, 2016, 08:26:53 AM
I never understood the concept of wanting to play a game to experience something exactly the way it happened historically.

What if Poland moved first...what if France extended the maginot line through the low counties or at least their borders with them.

I like historical contexts but to me playing a historical strategic game is seeing what else could have happened
I don't know the ins and outs of research, development, industry, infrastructure, commerce and any other strategic attributes of any country in the run up to WWII. As I don't know any of that and the game starts around 1936 (does this one?), I'm quite happy to believe that Poland can accelerate it's research and development, increase infrastructure having an effect on finances and therefore abilities not normally attributable to them during WWII.

Does that mean Poland can take over Europe? I don't really know. Does it mean Poland might be able to fend off Germany and possible take a country here or there? I'd like to think so.

Point is - I'm with jamus - I'm not really buying this to relive history. I know how it turned out. What I want to do in the game is change history - and I don't necessarily want to play one of the big boys to do it.

I think the game suffers from this criticism because it's a WWII game. If it was set 100 years in the future, people would (should) be perfectly happy with Poland running Russia. As it's a WWII setting and there's a base there, it's often perceived that it should follow it's course.

Of course, I think there should be limitations on countries and their abilities - but it should still be possible to change history.

Finally, I remember a post mentioning a post of a friend who frequented some forums where a poster had a pal who was on some forum saying Japan was invaded by Peru. I never saw that myself and I never met anyone who actually had that happen....it was always a post of a friend who knew someone.

If the game started from 1939 and the outset of war, then the status of the countries should, I think, be as they were in WWII. But as it starts earlier, then it should open up the entire game for a whole load of what ifs.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on May 19, 2016, 08:27:16 AM
I never understood the concept of wanting to play a game to experience something exactly the way it happened historically.

What if Poland moved first...what if France extended the maginot line through the low counties or at least their borders with them.

I like historical contexts but to me playing a historical strategic game is seeing what else could have happened

I agree with this but it has to be historically plausible... I'm with BBoyer66 on this. Hungary taking over all of those even minor countries is beyond the realm of possibility.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on May 19, 2016, 08:32:41 AM
Noticed he almost maxed out some tech branches as early as 1938-39.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on May 19, 2016, 08:48:07 AM
But Austro-Hungary did it before and more, I know wars were on a smaller scale back then but you just have to look at how quick France capitulated to Germany with a bigger army.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 19, 2016, 08:48:53 AM
I never understood the concept of wanting to play a game to experience something exactly the way it happened historically.

What if Poland moved first...what if France extended the maginot line through the low counties or at least their borders with them.

I like historical contexts but to me playing a historical strategic game is seeing what else could have happened

I agree with this but it has to be historically plausible...
I would buy that argument though. I'd like to see some historical constraints.., but I still want to change history.

Maybe an option ('cos gamers love options) to meet historical constraints or to take the shackles off and have your starting country start at 10/20/30%.....100%+ of it's historical abilities
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 19, 2016, 08:53:14 AM
I believe there is an option in HOI4 to have the AI follow a 'historical' path, and another option for a pure sandbox anything-can-happen campaign. I'll probably play historical more often than not.

To me, the question of "whether that could really have happened historically" boils down to this:  it's up to the player to decide what he wants to accomplish and how he wants the game to unfold. You will *always* have the advantage over the AI, no matter what. Could Hungary have conquered Eastern Europe in the 1930s? Of course not. Can a player play HOI so aggressively that he can push even minor powers to accomplish more than they could historically? Yes -- and that's always been the case with HOI.

In short, I think it will be the case that if you want HOI4 to unfold in a more historical, less implausible way, you'll have that option. If you are a 'maximalist' type player who is determined to conquer Europe as Bulgaria -- you can likely make that happen to. It's up to the player.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 19, 2016, 09:01:15 AM
Just for the record -- I *hate* the way this kid plays HOI in the World War Wednesdays videos. He does everything at the speed of light, puts almost no deliberation into anything he does before he's already done it. It's like watching someone jacked up on speed. It's no wonder his frantic, frenetic play style leads to, let's say, less than historical outcomes.

I have no intention of playing HOI the way it's depicted in these videos.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on May 19, 2016, 09:33:51 AM
Yes, they're hard to follow; much like many of the Stellaris videos that zoom all over the place. I guess he's played the game so much he could probably do it with his eyes closed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on May 19, 2016, 10:11:15 AM
Unless I wasn't getting it....it would seem that in the first 5 minutes of that "Hungary Conquers Europe" Wednesday video they openly state they had work-arounds (I'd have called them cheats)  that allowed them to instantly research any tech. They did so with tanks enabling them to bypass the usual time constraints and costs in constructing tank divisions. I assume that cheat won't be available for the public????  So the weird outcome of the Hungarian conquests is more understandable.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 19, 2016, 10:26:40 AM
It's interesting -- and maybe slightly worrying -- that the 2 release trailers for HOI4 so far feature 'what if' scenarios rather than 'what really happened' -- Germany conquering UK, and Japan launching an invasion of the Soviet Union. (I'd rank a successful Operation Sea Lion as deeply improbable bordering on impossible, and a Japanese invasion of USSR as deeply idiotic -- Japan was reluctant to provoke USSR even when they were fighting for their lives against Germany -- why on earth would Japan invade a USSR that had already defeated Germany -- ?!?)

I guess I see the attraction from an advertising perspective -- "Play HOI4 and change world history!!" Still, have to admit I find the over-the-top sensationalist approach a little irritating.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 19, 2016, 10:35:46 AM
One of the Let's Play videos talked about that. Seems like you can mostly follow the "what really happened" route if you choose to or you can choose to really change things. I hope that is the case.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on May 19, 2016, 12:39:13 PM
Of course we want to change history, but with somewhat realistic constraints.

  Conquering and occupying a nation should not be easy, and almost a wash in manpower/resources when it comes to securing an enemy nation.   A country like Hungary should find it near impossible to take Yugoslavia, let alone half of Europe. They just shouldn't have the manpower and resources to accomplish this. If a country just becomes more and more powerful with every country it takes, then that is a major problem in the design of the game right off the bat.  Most aggressive countries throughout history have seen their downfall through overextending. Seems in all the HOI games including this one, that you just keep getting more powerful every nation you take. Even in EU IV it takes almost 30+ years to really see any benefit from taking over provinces from other nations.

So in a nutshell, if this is the best the AI can fight against a human playing Hungary, why even bother playing? Can you imagine what you could do with a major power? 

 

 

 

 

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on May 19, 2016, 02:35:11 PM
I like strategy games - I'm just not very good at them. Trust me when I tell you what other people see as bad AI is generally kicking my arse

I can have a great game against a bad AI  :2funny:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on May 19, 2016, 02:37:52 PM
I like strategy games - I'm just not very good at them. Trust me when I tell you what other people see as bad AI is generally kicking my arse

I can have a great game against a bad AI  :2funny:
same here... One of my first games of HoI3 I got the shit kicked out of me by France playing as Germany
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 19, 2016, 04:03:09 PM
I like strategy games - I'm just not very good at them. Trust me when I tell you what other people see as bad AI is generally kicking my arse

I can have a great game against a bad AI  :2funny:
same here... One of my first games of HoI3 I got the shit kicked out of me by France playing as Germany

+100
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on May 19, 2016, 04:05:07 PM
Tell me about it. I'm excited that I just won the 1st tutorial for Sengoku Jidai Shadow of the Shogun.  ::)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 19, 2016, 04:12:36 PM
For me, I play at a slow pace and treat the game like a historical sim as much as it allows me to. I don't make unrealistic builds and I role play each nation. I get a lot more enjoyment this way instead of rushing through.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 19, 2016, 04:23:54 PM
Ian, I think that goes with most of here.  When I play I minor player, my goals are a lot more limited than conquering the world.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 19, 2016, 07:10:21 PM
Put my order in....originally was thinking about the more expensive versions, but settled on Cadet version.  I plan to play with counters so getting extra sprite graphics didn't seem worth it, plus we all know in a future Steam sale they will be dirt cheap:)  As for the FM version with the included expansions, seems like those will be a little ways off and likely can pick them up later from one of the cheap sites...

June 6th, we are waiting!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 19, 2016, 08:01:12 PM
I remembered that PDox gave me a $25 coupon due to a weird technical issue I had with CKII sound that they couldn't fix.  Ordered.   Can someone teach me to mod so I can make bombers work?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on May 20, 2016, 06:35:00 AM
I recommend everyone just buy a copy of the World In Flames boardgame. The AI is just as good as HOI, and its near impossible for Hungary to take over most of Europe in 2 years.    ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on May 20, 2016, 06:46:42 PM
I recommend everyone just buy a copy of the World In Flames boardgame. The AI is just as good as HOI, and its near impossible for Hungary to take over most of Europe in 2 years.    ;)

Good alternative...but learning curve and table space needs are a lot higher...;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on May 20, 2016, 10:36:54 PM
Ian, I think that goes with most of here.  When I play I minor player, my goals are a lot more limited than conquering the world.

A problem for me with the HOI games, and this is just for me. Theres too many options for nations. Like what is even the point of Brazil, or Jamaica, or a tiny country in the middle of nowhere.

I mean really how many goals can you set for nations like that
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on May 21, 2016, 02:05:23 AM
Ian, I think that goes with most of here.  When I play I minor player, my goals are a lot more limited than conquering the world.

A problem for me with the HOI games, and this is just for me. Theres too many options for nations. Like what is even the point of Brazil, or Jamaica, or a tiny country in the middle of nowhere.

I mean really how many goals can you set for nations like that

The better players could become great powers starting with just about anybody, including one of those mass of 1-province states in Germany.  You could look up strategies to win with lots of different countries on the wiki.  Probably the Native Americans were the hardest, but I saw an AAR of a guy who defeated the foreign invaders and united the tribes. 

Talking in the past tense because I'm not sure if any of that's possible with the latest patch.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on May 22, 2016, 12:17:35 PM
Ian, I think that goes with most of here.  When I play I minor player, my goals are a lot more limited than conquering the world.

A problem for me with the HOI games, and this is just for me. Theres too many options for nations. Like what is even the point of Brazil, or Jamaica, or a tiny country in the middle of nowhere.

I mean really how many goals can you set for nations like that

Just replying to myself here, because I happened across this reply, and if you think I'm being stupid, you're right.  Somehow I either thought we were talking about EU, or decided I wanted to change the subject, or . . . something.   :coolsmiley: 

 :idiot2:

The better players could become great powers starting with just about anybody, including one of those mass of 1-province states in Germany.  You could look up strategies to win with lots of different countries on the wiki.  Probably the Native Americans were the hardest, but I saw an AAR of a guy who defeated the foreign invaders and united the tribes. 

Talking in the past tense because I'm not sure if any of that's possible with the latest patch.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bobarossa on May 23, 2016, 01:47:20 PM
Ian, I think that goes with most of here.  When I play I minor player, my goals are a lot more limited than conquering the world.

A problem for me with the HOI games, and this is just for me. Theres too many options for nations. Like what is even the point of Brazil, or Jamaica, or a tiny country in the middle of nowhere.

I mean really how many goals can you set for nations like that

Just replying to myself here, because I happened across this reply, and if you think I'm being stupid, you're right.  Somehow I either thought we were talking about EU, or decided I wanted to change the subject, or . . . something.   :coolsmiley: 

 :idiot2:

The better players could become great powers starting with just about anybody, including one of those mass of 1-province states in Germany.  You could look up strategies to win with lots of different countries on the wiki.  Probably the Native Americans were the hardest, but I saw an AAR of a guy who defeated the foreign invaders and united the tribes. 

Talking in the past tense because I'm not sure if any of that's possible with the latest patch.

I WAS slightly confused when I read it, but that's a normal condition for me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on May 23, 2016, 02:34:29 PM
I think people are making a bit much over nothing. In HOI3 (and HOI4 I bet) the AI will follow the historical path and it turns out pretty much like history. The only problems I have seen are that Japan conquers China too quickly. The only problem I could see would be multiplayer, but you can choose who you play with.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on May 25, 2016, 09:28:35 PM
I am hoping that HOI4 is going to be as polished as Stellaris which is a big hit imho. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on May 26, 2016, 09:29:57 AM
Saw Hearts of Iron 4 Cadets Edition (6/6/16 release date) on sale for $26.45 at the cdkeys.com site.  Digital download on Steam.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on May 26, 2016, 09:49:58 AM
According to Paradox, if you're a cheapskate and buy the Cadet's Edition your soldier sprites will be replaced with Pokemon characters. Or so I've heard.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 26, 2016, 01:04:19 PM
Man, I would give Gus's left nut for this to come out on Memorial Day instead of D-Day....

(Sorry Gus, just keeping with tradition   :) )
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on May 26, 2016, 01:06:37 PM
Man, I would give Gus's left nut for this to come out on Memorial Day instead of D-Day....

(Sorry Gus, just keeping with tradition   :) )

I thought he lost that for the Stellaris launch.

We'll have to sacrifice the right one instead :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on May 26, 2016, 02:46:02 PM
According to Paradox, if you're a cheapskate and buy the Cadet's Edition your soldier sprites will be replaced with Pokemon characters. Or so I've heard.

I'm tempted to buy the Cadet's Edition then update it when all things Hearts of Iron IV go on sale for 75% off. >:D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on May 26, 2016, 03:08:44 PM
Man, I would give Gus's left nut for this to come out on Memorial Day instead of D-Day....

(Sorry Gus, just keeping with tradition   :) )

I thought he lost that for the Stellaris launch.

We'll have to sacrifice the right one instead :)

I think we're saving his right one for Civ VI.  Perhaps have to sacrifice something more on the centerline. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 26, 2016, 03:55:43 PM
According to Paradox, if you're a cheapskate and buy the Cadet's Edition your soldier sprites will be replaced with Pokemon characters. Or so I've heard.

Count me in as being a cheapskate:)  I am sure eventually I will buy all the goodies, but can wait for all that stuff in a future sale....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 26, 2016, 04:00:41 PM
Count me in as being a cheapskate:)  I am sure eventually I will buy all the goodies, but can wait for all that stuff in a future sale....

I'm waiting to buy the game itself in a future sale.  I wonder whether Paradox has shot itself in the foot releasing so close to Stellaris.  I still think I'll be playing Stellaris months from now, and I only have time for one grand strategy at a time.  I can't be the only one.  As excited as I am for HoI4, there's just no point buying it right now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 26, 2016, 04:03:14 PM
Count me in as being a cheapskate:)  I am sure eventually I will buy all the goodies, but can wait for all that stuff in a future sale....

I'm waiting to buy the game itself in a future sale.  I wonder whether Paradox has shot itself in the foot releasing so close to Stellaris.  I still think I'll be playing Stellaris months from now, and I only have time for one grand strategy at a time.  I can't be the only one.  As excited as I am for HoI4, there's just no point buying it right now.

Sadly, I am a compulsive buyer, whether I will fully play it any time soon:)  And since I know I will buy it eventually, might as well take advantage of the pre-order sales since I am guessing future sales likely won't happen in the next few months...but who knows.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 26, 2016, 04:27:05 PM
When HOI4 comes out, I have no doubt it is going to clear everything else off my gaming plate for weeks.

Absolutely my most anticipated release in years.   O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 26, 2016, 04:28:46 PM
When HOI4 comes out, I have no doubt it is going to clear everything else off my gaming plate for weeks.

Absolutely my most anticipated release in years.   O0

I really hope it is good for your health's sake.....you have created very high expectations so hoping it does not let you down:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on May 26, 2016, 06:01:18 PM
Yeah, I ordered the kiddies edition through Instant Gaming a while back. The series, for all its faults, has been my favorite WWII strategic wargame for years. Can't wait.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on May 26, 2016, 06:19:27 PM
I really hope it is good for your health's sake.....you have created very high expectations so hoping it does not let you down:)

What do you mean? I merely expect HoI4 to be the most exciting, realistic strategic simulation of WW2 ever created -- in a word, perfect.

So yeah, my expectations are entirely tempered by reality and past experience.   ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: nht on May 26, 2016, 09:05:14 PM
HoI is just one of those games that I never really could grasp. I owned EU1 & EU2 (and EU: Crown of the North!) and the original Victoria, and I loved them all. So HoI seemed like a no-brainer... but I really bounced off it. Same with HoI 2 and 3. Just never could get into them. It's always puzzled me as to why, since it -should- be right up my alley.

So I'll probably wait a year or so and pick up HoI4 once it's gone on massive sale, but at this point my hopes are not high that I will enjoy it (though I'm always happy to be surprised -- the original Crusader Kings left me cold, but CK2 is one of the best strategy games I've played).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 26, 2016, 11:46:30 PM
What do you mean? I merely expect HoI4 to be the most exciting, realistic strategic simulation of WW2 ever created -- in a word, perfect.

So yeah, my expectations are entirely tempered by reality and past experience.   ;)

LOL!  Like Grim, I really hope you enjoy it mate!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on May 27, 2016, 04:55:53 AM
I really hope it is good for your health's sake.....you have created very high expectations so hoping it does not let you down:)

What do you mean? I merely expect HoI4 to be the most exciting, realistic strategic simulation of WW2 ever created -- in a word, perfect.

So yeah, my expectations are entirely tempered by reality and past experience.   ;)

Well, I am certainly pulling for you:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on May 27, 2016, 06:08:09 AM
Anyone wanting Paradox to include a game manual with Hearts of Iron IV might be interested in this thread (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/manual.936903/) in the Paradox forums.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 27, 2016, 08:23:05 AM
I pre-ordered from Kinguin/G2PLAY.NET for only $28. Seems legit. What's the deal with these cheap deals? (no pun intended).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Tuna on May 27, 2016, 08:40:50 AM
I pre-ordered from Kinguin/G2PLAY.NET for only $28. Seems legit. What's the deal with these cheap deals? (no pun intended).

Just discussed in the 'sales' thread

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=3624.3975 (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=3624.3975)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on May 27, 2016, 08:54:52 AM
Well I hope Kinguin are legit.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: AchillesLastStand on May 27, 2016, 11:08:34 AM
What are the differences in the versions? What exactly are the Tank/Cruiser packs? Cosmetic only?

*Edit*
Just read on the store page that the differences are only cosmetic. I assume this means you see the actual unit instead of a counter?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on May 27, 2016, 11:24:05 AM
I'm pretty sure everyone sees units rather than counters, but the cosmetic packs will change their appearance.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 01, 2016, 07:06:51 PM
Sounds like media embargo ends on tomorrow 6/2, not sure what exact time because of all the time zone conversions:)  But not long now....Sandman will be very happy:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Vintage Dude on June 01, 2016, 07:22:51 PM
I bought from Green Man Gaming yesterday for 25% off. I immediately received the Steam key and Steam added the game to my library without a problem. Now I am ready to download when it is released. :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 01, 2016, 07:38:36 PM
But not long now....Sandman will be very happy:)

Still too long !!   :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 02, 2016, 02:01:33 AM
Sounds like media embargo ends on tomorrow 6/2, not sure what exact time because of all the time zone conversions:)  But not long now....Sandman will be very happy:)

Quill18's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs3acGYgI1-stmmaOdyLR1FS1hvUIflCL
Arumba's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfm9XNvwBFG_16vR8sZcrT0hXzxoj5icJ
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 02, 2016, 04:39:19 AM
I was thinking how long of a weekend it's going to be waiting for this game to release....then I thought about how the men who were landing in Normandy felt in the days before the invasion...at least the ones who knew the actual date.

Made the wait a little more manageable.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 02, 2016, 04:52:00 AM
Sounds like media embargo ends on tomorrow 6/2, not sure what exact time because of all the time zone conversions:)  But not long now....Sandman will be very happy:)

Quill18's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs3acGYgI1-stmmaOdyLR1FS1hvUIflCL
Arumba's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfm9XNvwBFG_16vR8sZcrT0hXzxoj5icJ

Thanks for sharing...took a quick look at Quill's and so far liked what I saw....just a few more days.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 06:34:01 AM
Watching those Lets Plays is painful.  Cool, but painful. Gonna be a long weekend, and not in the good way.

Actually still not certain who I'll play my first game as.  What are y'all thinking?

Germany is usually the optimal choice for a first go around. They're strong militarily, industrially, and tech-wise. Plus they get into the fightin' at the earliest date (in Europe, that is).

Other first 'easy' option is the USA -- though waiting out until you actually join the war can be a bit of a drag. Still, this is probably where I'll start.

Intriguing other options are Italy and France. I like that they're not as sprawling as British Empire or USSR. Both are militarily capable and manageable. If I'm feeling more daring I may start with one of these.

Pretty certain the following are out for my first play thru --  UK, USSR, Japan. Love all 3, but don't want to deal with their particular challenges right away.  Impressed that Arumba chose USSR. The man has gumption!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 02, 2016, 06:40:05 AM
I usually play as a smaller nation first, greece, romania, bulgaria. I find jumping into the major powers in info overload
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 06:47:48 AM
I never play minors like Greece, etc. In past HOI, they just never had the capacity to do much of interest, unless your only ambitions are *really* local goals ('conquer parts of Bulgaria' kind of thing).

Italy is basically as 'weak' as I go. There's just to much interest in what all the majors can achieve that I find I never get bored alternating among USA, Germany, UK, USSR, Japan, Italy, France.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 02, 2016, 06:53:30 AM
I'm 23 minutes into Quill's second video and I think I'm utterly sold.



Actually still not certain who I'll play my first game as.  What are y'all thinking?

Apparently, Italy is the nation we play in the tutorial and we can continue to play after the tutorial has ended. This might be a good place to start, in case we mess things up during the learning experience, leaving the other majors for a later treat after becoming more familiar.

However...I'm spoilt for choice. I usually favour the UK or US as my go-to. Plus, we have two starting points: 36 or 39. I'd be tempted to play as the UK for '39. A few months of prep time, and war in Africa before the Blitzkrieg.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 02, 2016, 07:17:46 AM
Preordered :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 02, 2016, 07:27:45 AM
I'm not pre-ordering. Since this will be my first HoI game, like...ever, I'm going to wait and see if there are any major bugs or patches that need to come out after the first several weeks and wait and see what the grogs here think of the game/share their knowledge.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 02, 2016, 08:30:55 AM
Man - loooong weekend indeed.

I'm wet just thinking about watching Quill's videos. He turned me right on to MoO  :))
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 02, 2016, 08:43:37 AM
Can someone link me this video? Not sure who Quill is  :-\

Thank you
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 02, 2016, 09:06:35 AM
Quill18's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs3acGYgI1-stmmaOdyLR1FS1hvUIflCL
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 02, 2016, 09:07:51 AM
Thank you Pete!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 02, 2016, 09:47:23 AM
Quill18's let's play : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs3acGYgI1-stmmaOdyLR1FS1hvUIflCL

Quite impressive looking game but there's no way I'm watching 3.5 hours of 'let's play' videos....!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 10:09:22 AM
Sad thing is, I probably could watch 3.5 hours of HOI4 video, if I let myself. (I won't.)

This is one of those times where sheer excitement for a new game makes all my existing library seem dull and not worth the effort...  Which maybe isn't a bad thing -- plenty of other work and chores I should get done instead!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 02, 2016, 10:14:14 AM

This is one of those times where sheer excitement for a new game makes all my existing library seem dull and not worth the effort... 

I was the same until I picked up Witcher 3 on sale two days ago. Glad I did. What a game. Back to topic...


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 10:47:31 AM
Witcher 3 is too hard for me. I'm absolutely terrible at the combat.

But as a technical and artistic achievement? Wow, yes, Witcher 3 is astonishing. It features the most convincing game-world I've ever experienced -- frankly puts Bethesda's games to shame.

anyhoo -- wish i was playing HOI4 this weekend ...    :'(
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on June 02, 2016, 10:49:15 AM
Any review yet?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 02, 2016, 12:17:43 PM
You know what always screws with my head in these games (HoI games)? Timing

I'm always gobsmacked and knocked back by the time it takes to research things. Unlike CiV where it's kind of fed to you and you see how long it takes but because it's over centuries, the time to research things doesn't phase me.

But with HoI games, looking at researching L6 Light Tanks takes 198 days!! That's over 1/2 a year! Researching Synthetic Oil takes 297 days (a year!)

And because of the time scale of HoI games, I'm very wary about how long things take to build and how long I have!

So that always throws me. Really looking forward to this though.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 02, 2016, 12:48:11 PM
Any review yet?

Not that I have seen...but wouldn't matter anyway, it won't sway me:)  Pre-ordered and ready to go!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
Here's an early review:

IT'S FREAKIN' AWESOME !!!

(Full disclosure: This review based on 100% pure speculation and sky-high expectations.)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 02, 2016, 01:20:20 PM
Witcher 3 is too hard for me. I'm absolutely terrible at the combat.
Have you tried it on the lowest difficulty? It's a shame not to experience this game. It's unreasonably wonderful in all aspects.

There's also a card game within the game called Gwent that is possibly one of the best and most addictive tactical card games I've ever seen. It takes several games but when it clicks you'll get hooked.

I really can't wait for HOI 4. I never thought we'd have such great toys at middle age.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 01:40:58 PM
It's not just the combat, though. It's just the sheer, overwhelming size of the world, the complexity of the lore, etc. etc. My mind just can't absorb it right now (esp. since I never played any of the previous Witchers).

Witcher 3 is definitely one of those games I have on my HD that I regret not playing, because I know how amazing it seems. But it's way beyond my mental capacity at the moment --
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 02, 2016, 02:05:28 PM
It's not just the combat, though. It's just the sheer, overwhelming size of the world, the complexity of the lore, etc. etc. My mind just can't absorb it right now (esp. since I never played any of the previous Witchers).

Witcher 3 is definitely one of those games I have on my HD that I regret not playing, because I know how amazing it seems. But it's way beyond my mental capacity at the moment --

I played Witcher 1 but you are right, there's lot of lore to absorb. I cope with it by playing in small bursts.

As far as watching Quill's HOI4 videos, I just finished the last one and I think it's too much like torture now.
The end came when while pausing the vid to absorb some detail, I clicked on the GUI to check it out and realised it wasn't the game.
Roll on Monday.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 02, 2016, 02:44:16 PM
It's not just the combat, though. It's just the sheer, overwhelming size of the world, the complexity of the lore, etc. etc. My mind just can't absorb it right now (esp. since I never played any of the previous Witchers).

Witcher 3 is definitely one of those games I have on my HD that I regret not playing, because I know how amazing it seems. But it's way beyond my mental capacity at the moment --

I played Witcher 1 but you are right, there's lot of lore to absorb. I cope with it by playing in small bursts.



As far as watching Quill's HOI4 videos, I just finished the last one and I think it's too much like torture now.
The end came when while pausing the vid to absorb some detail, I clicked on the GUI to check it out and realised it wasn't the game.
Roll on Monday.


I just watched his first two videos playing Italy.....

I don't think I can wait to buy the game  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 02, 2016, 02:46:11 PM
I have no idea how The Witcher 3 turned up in this thread - but I'd add it's a fantastic game!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 02, 2016, 03:17:02 PM
Adding tot he thread convergence I literally fired up Witcher 3 yesterday and bought the two DLCs for it.  Its the only console type game that I have ever finished and very immersive and lovely to play.

Now I am watching Quills HOI4 videos and this game which was never on my radar screen now has me thinking I need to get this as well.

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 03:45:31 PM
Now I am watching Quills HOI4 videos and this game which was never on my radar screen now has me thinking I need to get this as well.

You do.   ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 02, 2016, 03:47:36 PM
I wonder what Sandman would do if they suddenly announced a 3-month delay?  Might be a fun experiment:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 03:51:45 PM
I wonder what Sandman would do if they suddenly announced a 3-month delay?  Might be a fun experiment:)

You cruel, cruel man. I'm henceforth labeling you "Prince of Terror" in keeping with HOI's traditional character traits.   :coolsmiley:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 02, 2016, 03:54:30 PM
I wonder what Sandman would do if they suddenly announced a 3-month delay?  Might be a fun experiment:)

You cruel, cruel man. I'm henceforth labeling you "Prince of Terror" in keeping with HOI's traditional character traits.   :coolsmiley:

I am actually looking forward to it myself, I am just trying to hide my excitement since still 4 days to go:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 02, 2016, 06:30:31 PM
You know what always screws with my head in these games (HoI games)? Timing

I'm always gobsmacked and knocked back by the time it takes to research things. Unlike CiV where it's kind of fed to you and you see how long it takes but because it's over centuries, the time to research things doesn't phase me.

But with HoI games, looking at researching L6 Light Tanks takes 198 days!! That's over 1/2 a year! Researching Synthetic Oil takes 297 days (a year!)

And because of the time scale of HoI games, I'm very wary about how long things take to build and how long I have!

So that always throws me. Really looking forward to this though.

Isn't that realistic? A day can go by quickly anyway since it is real time.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 02, 2016, 07:27:32 PM
What wi
I wonder what Sandman would do if they suddenly announced a 3-month delay?  Might be a fun experiment:)

I wonder how Sandman would react if HOI4 releases tomorrow but he didn't know about it until Monday!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 02, 2016, 07:37:07 PM
Neither scenario would be optimal, as far as I'm concerned.  Still, I'd take 3-day early stealth release over 3 month delay, if forced to choose.   :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: AchillesLastStand on June 02, 2016, 09:15:24 PM
This is one of the better videos I have seen from the last couple days. Come Monday I am going to start an American campaign, it will be called "you didn't build that".
 ;D


https://youtu.be/VyCL1LIESR8
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 03, 2016, 02:29:16 AM
This is one of the better videos I have seen from the last couple days.
https://youtu.be/VyCL1LIESR8

Now, that's more like it. 'Historical Plausibility' is an exciting feature. Rather than some random AI idiocy we see France in a civil war with the communists and not taking any nonsense over Germany's reoccupation of the Rhineland. This is why historical games, when done well, can open up unexpected opportunities for ahistorical but entirely plausible paths into new wargaming territory.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 03, 2016, 05:34:56 AM
He's invading France in 1936??  ???
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 03, 2016, 06:04:40 AM
UK play-through here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScVCgPsKkNY
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Freyland on June 03, 2016, 07:02:12 AM
This is one of the better videos I have seen from the last couple days. Come Monday I am going to start an American campaign, it will be called "you didn't build that".
 ;D


https://youtu.be/VyCL1LIESR8
The Hitler picture on the Political pop-up has it's eyes crossed.  If you cannot un-see it, I deeply apologize.  >:D

I hate watching videos of complicated games where the player knows what he is doing, and I haven't a clue.  I get a headache and eye strain from trying to follow all the details as he speeds through them, and HOI4 uses lots of palate and texture changes to differentiate what overlay you are using.  I need morphine now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 03, 2016, 07:15:18 AM
He's invading France in 1936??  ???

And captured
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 03, 2016, 09:26:28 AM
Quote
I hate watching videos of complicated games where the player knows what he is doing, and I haven't a clue.  I get a headache and eye strain from trying to follow all the details as he speeds through them, and HOI4 uses lots of palate and texture changes to differentiate what overlay you are using.  I need morphine now.

This is why I generally don't watch these videos. The new beginners tutorials are watchable, however, as he demonstrates the game at a more measured pace.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 03, 2016, 09:27:03 AM
Being able to automate trade in HoI3 was greatly appreciated by me....anyone know if it can be done in IV...?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: smittyohio on June 03, 2016, 12:04:30 PM
Still curious if this can reasonably simulate the Pacific War or not....  anyone see any videos showing such?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 03, 2016, 12:16:48 PM
Still curious if this can reasonably simulate the Pacific War or not....  anyone see any videos showing such?

Not yet. This is one area I'm very interested in also. I really want to see a pre-release peek at AI Japan and U.S vs. AI Japan.
However, what I've seen overall so far has completely sold me on HOI4. 
On a minor note there are options to turn off 3D buildings and units and also to select NATO counters.
Super happy.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 03, 2016, 12:43:30 PM
That's good news about the counter option. Didn't think it was going to make it into the game this time.

I'm also a little concerned about the lack of Pacific gameplay videos. Here's hoping it has improved.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 03, 2016, 12:51:28 PM
Curious too about Pacific War but have to be honest, I'm not expecting miracles here, at least not in the state HOI4 will be in at launch on Monday.

I think we have to accept there are going to be growing pains with this game. I have no doubt there will be parts of the game that feel underdeveloped and in serious need of improvement. Naval warfare may well fall into that category, I don't know.

What I do know is to avoid the Paradox HOI4 forum. The amount of bitching and complaining over there is really something to behold, for a game that hasn't even released yet. I've been posting there but am going to stop now -- it's a fool's errand trying to persuade people there that (A) no, the game isn't broken and (B) to maybe, just maybe, be a little patient and give Pdox time to improve some areas of the game. It's like the forum is populated 90% by 12-year-olds. Or shut-ins with little idea of how the real world functions. Maybe both at the same time...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on June 03, 2016, 02:18:24 PM
Still curious if this can reasonably simulate the Pacific War or not....  anyone see any videos showing such?

 Considering that right now it cant do a very good Europe, I am skeptical.  Just watched Quill18 curb stomp ......... well frankly whoever he wanted as Italy.   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 03, 2016, 03:48:14 PM
I'm really, really not fussed about the historical accuracy at all.

I'm hoping to have some fun building and empire as whomever  ;D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 03, 2016, 04:21:49 PM
Agree JD -- ultimately I want to see the AI put up a decent fight, to see a meaningful Pacific War, and all the rest in the 'historically plausible' department. But I'm not expecting to get that on Monday. I think it's going to take time, patches, expansions.

Right now, I just am dying to get my hands on the damn thing...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 03, 2016, 04:40:15 PM
What I do know is to avoid the Paradox HOI4 forum. The amount of bitching and complaining over there is really something to behold, for a game that hasn't even released yet. I've been posting there but am going to stop now -- it's a fool's errand trying to persuade people there that (A) no, the game isn't broken and (B) to maybe, just maybe, be a little patient and give Pdox time to improve some areas of the game. It's like the forum is populated 90% by 12-year-olds. Or shut-ins with little idea of how the real world functions. Maybe both at the same time...

This is why I've avoided the Stellaris forums.  Well, that and if you post something a 8am, 5 pages can be added to the post by the time I can get back to it at the end of day, most having nothing to do with the post. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: dinsdale on June 03, 2016, 07:52:03 PM
Agree JD -- ultimately I want to see the AI put up a decent fight, to see a meaningful Pacific War, and all the rest in the 'historically plausible' department. But I'm not expecting to get that on Monday. I think it's going to take time, patches, expansions.

Right now, I just am dying to get my hands on the damn thing...
While I've had a lot of fun with HOI, including with v 1.0 of HOI-1, the things you're asking for have been unavailable for the last 14 years of games, expansions and patches. What has been demonstrated that this version will accomplish what they have never managed in the past?

HOI has been a great deal of fun at times, but it has never managed to provide a WW2 experience, or allow for meaningful, plausible gameplay as Britain, US or Italy.


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 04, 2016, 04:02:37 AM
I have no doubt there will be parts of the game that feel underdeveloped and in serious need of improvement. Naval warfare may well fall into that category, I don't know.

I saw naval combat running on some of the playthrough vids and it looked pretty robust to me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 04, 2016, 04:06:45 AM
I have no doubt there will be parts of the game that feel underdeveloped and in serious need of improvement. Naval warfare may well fall into that category, I don't know.

I saw naval combat running on some of the playthrough vids and it looked pretty robust to me.

The state of the game will be interesting...although people believe it will be a typical "Paradox" game, it was delayed a very long time from original release, which in theory and hopefully the extra time was used for polishing.  Regardless, every game has its issues on release and I would expect the same from this one as well, its just a matter of how much and how much of an impact.  Luckily, I am a below average person in these strategic games so I likely won't notice all the issues that will be reported....I may have to impose a ban on myself to not read any forum material on it:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 04, 2016, 06:08:51 AM
While we're waiting...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt7o1v9msA0&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 04, 2016, 07:41:06 AM
I posted this about Stellaris, but I think it applies to HOI4, and many other games also. 

Quote
I got to thinking about the state of Stellaris at release.  I really do think it was a solid release, the grumblings are design decisions or features that didn't always seem to go far enough.  But perhaps Paradox (and other designers) have it right by not releasing a perfect game.  By releasing Stellaris at 50% with a playable game with no major bugs, they're now able to sit back, and listen to the community give feed back on where to go from.  Trying to listen to a community before a game is released is hard, as people cannot see how the different pieces fit together.  Now, people can give more focused and useful feedback that Paradox can use.

I install IT for cardiology departments in hospitals.  There are no 2 hospitals that do things the same way.  Even hospitals that have the same parent company don't.   Customers are always amazed when they ask why we haven't implemented a feature they want, and we tell them no one else has ever asked for it.  Imagine how hard it is with hundreds of thousands users instead of a few hundred or a few thousand.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 04, 2016, 08:22:43 AM
Yeah, it just blows me away the inability of so many people on the Pdox forums to keep things in perspective, to acknowledge that creating a game as complex as HOI isn't easy, that there will be bumps along the road, that the game will need patches and expansions to reach its fullest potential, and (gasp!) Pdox will ask you to pay for some of that extra DLC / expansion content...  I think a lot of those guys must just lack the real-world experience that OJsDad points out. They expect perfection out of the gate, and whine like 5 year olds when, amazingly, reality doesn't work out that way...

@dinsdale -- I suppose it depends on what you mean by "a WW2 experience".  I've also been with the series since the original HOI, and I can't think of another game that accomplishes what HOI accomplishes:  a 'pick any country' and guide your way through the most all-encompassing war in history, starting in 1936.  I'd call that a pretty unique WW2 experience.

Other 'big strategy' games -- thinking especially of GG's War in the Pacific -- are amazingly detailed recreations, and games every hardcore WW2 enthusiast should play. But I'm not sure that means they are necessarily 'better' WW2 games than HOI. They emphasize different things, make different demands, but just because WITP is more historically precise than HOI doesn't mean HOI is somehow inauthentic, I think.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 04, 2016, 08:32:47 AM
I've also been with the series since the original HOI, and I can't think of another game that accomplishes what HOI accomplishes:  a 'pick any country' and guide your way through the most all-encompassing war in history, starting in 1936.  I'd call that a pretty unique WW2 experience.

Prior to this, I think the only PC WW2 game of the same scope was Civilisation 2 WW2. When HOI 1 came along, it was sensational.


Release time: Monday June 6th  17:00 GMT. That's when bandwidth-a-geddon starts.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on June 04, 2016, 10:45:04 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 04, 2016, 11:23:13 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.

+1...very true!  And yet being turn based it plays quite differently.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 04, 2016, 12:00:35 PM
My personal opinion - drop the need / connotation that ww2 needs to happen. IE make HoI more like a time extension of Vicky rather than a ww2 simulation. I would like pdox to have a game run from say 1900 to 1970 or so.
My point is the whole thing with pdox games is having the ability to shape things the way you want.
What if the Duke Ferdinand was never assassinated. Or Hitler never came to power. Maybe the Russian bear sweeps through Europe. Japan controls China. Yes there are games that let you fight ww2 much better than the HOI series. I like exploring the effects of even small changes in history may have.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 04, 2016, 01:54:12 PM
That's when bandwidth-a-geddon starts.

Not too worried about that. The Stellaris download was surprisingly small -- something like 2 GB, right?  I'd be surprised is HOI4's download will be much larger -- if it's bigger than 5 GB I'll be surprised.  Guess we'll soon see!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 04, 2016, 03:52:43 PM
That's when bandwidth-a-geddon starts.

Not too worried about that. The Stellaris download was surprisingly small -- something like 2 GB, right?  I'd be surprised is HOI4's download will be much larger -- if it's bigger than 5 GB I'll be surprised.  Guess we'll soon see!

According to requirements page, 2GB of storage is needed....so I would think the download should be 2GB or less...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 05, 2016, 05:25:38 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.

+1...very true!  And yet being turn based it plays quite differently.

Making History is turn based?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 05, 2016, 05:29:03 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.

+1...very true!  And yet being turn based it plays quite differently.

Making History is turn based?

Yep...the original release took so long to shake out all the bugs, I have never really gone back....not sure how it plays nowadays.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 05, 2016, 05:37:26 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.

+1...very true!  And yet being turn based it plays quite differently.

Making History is turn based?

Yep...the original release took so long to shake out all the bugs, I have never really gone back....not sure how it plays nowadays.

Jesus...I must be getting old, or just losing my mind. I totally didn't remember this game being turn based...at one point I played this game a lot. But I struggled to get back into it again subsequently.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 05, 2016, 05:44:07 AM
Always seemed to have potential, not sure why I couldn't wrap my brain around it...back in those days, the fact it was turned based was always the main comparison point between it and HOI...turn vs realtime, each set of fans had their own views....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 05, 2016, 06:11:12 AM
HOI 4 appears to be the most mod-friendly version so far and I'm looking forward to seeing what modders come up with. It's very exciting because the quality and historical accuracy that some modders achieve is excellent and this appears to be by far the most accessible and playable version of HOI yet.

I've watched most of the better Let's Play videos and I'm stoked. Just over 24 hours left until release.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on June 05, 2016, 06:40:00 AM
^Like a Turtledove Worldwar: In the Balance mod?  ^-^
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 05, 2016, 08:30:35 AM
^Like a Turtledove Worldwar: In the Balance mod?  ^-^
Of course!


Official tutorials:



Beginner Tutorial - Battle plans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRkkqv6B7I8

Beginner Tutorial - Construction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7qu2UcSIkM

Beginner Tutorial - Production and Deployment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWu1p46PyIY

Beginner Tutorial - Division Designer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuMbmL0jSQY

Beginner Tutorial - Air Force

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3hit9HSNNE
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 05, 2016, 11:07:54 AM
Making History does but it is very sandbox.

+1...very true!  And yet being turn based it plays quite differently.

Making History is turn based?

Yes.....The WW1 version, The Great War, has one week turns. Not sure about WW2 but I suspect it is the same.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Moreb on June 05, 2016, 07:54:54 PM
I just purchased HoI4 for $29.99 at green man gaming using the code of JUNE25. That's a 25% coupon. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 05, 2016, 10:15:00 PM
Thanks for the tip I just did the same at 11:59 pm Eastern time today!

Its a little after midnight right now and no download but I did just add it to my steam library of games

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 06, 2016, 06:18:47 AM
I think HOI IV will be good and stable when it releases later today, but I've decided to hold off for the moment.  I'm liking Stellaris, 7DaystoDie and EU IV right now and work has me traveling a lot, so not going to put money into a game that I'm not going to have time for. 

I will be following this thread though.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 06, 2016, 06:37:38 AM
I think HOI IV will be good and stable when it releases later today, but I've decided to hold off for the moment.  I'm liking Stellaris, 7DaystoDie and EU IV right now and work has me traveling a lot, so not going to put money into a game that I'm not going to have time for. 

I will be following this thread though.

This is where I am as well with HOI IV. And it's summer so not much inside time.  :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 06:41:00 AM
Midday and still no key  :(

Mind you - I am actually at work so can't do anything with the key anyway!  >:D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 06, 2016, 06:43:15 AM
Stellaris released about noon time in the eastern US.  I would expect the same for HOI IV.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 06, 2016, 07:34:17 AM
Launch stream is online : https://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive

Release should be at 18.00 CEST (2h30 from now)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 06, 2016, 08:15:57 AM
IGN Review:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/06/06/1558481
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 08:44:34 AM
I got my key  ;D

Still at work  :(
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 06, 2016, 09:10:38 AM
Good deal JD.   Keep us up on your impressions. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 06, 2016, 09:11:47 AM
IGN Review:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/06/06/1558481

Hope the review got it right.  Amazing (9 out of 10 score) sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 09:19:28 AM
I got my key  ;D

Still at work  :(

+1.  No idea if my key is available but very much stuck at work... am not going to be able to get to this til after work, dinner, kiddos etc. asleep later tonight. The thought of it is going to be in the back of my mind all day. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 06, 2016, 09:20:42 AM
Oh, what do these computer games do to us, eh?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 06, 2016, 09:25:18 AM
I got my key  ;D

Still at work  :(

+1.  No idea if my key is available but very much stuck at work... am not going to be able to get to this til after work, dinner, kiddos etc. asleep later tonight. The thought of it is going to be in the back of my mind all day.

Same here...I have a really long day before I'll be able to sit down and check this out tonight. Of course, the wife is working overnight so I'm stuck on toddler duty.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 09:26:17 AM
Oh, what do these computer games do to us, eh?

 :)  Yeah, it's kinda unhealthy.  But then, so are many of the best things in life (to wit: alcohol.  Or donuts). 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 09:29:13 AM
Of course, the wife is working overnight so I'm stuck on toddler duty.

My sympathies. Hope your little 'un(s) is not too hard to put to sleep....  Mine are good about going down at a decent hour (good) but also very early risers (bad).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
IGN Review:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/06/06/1558481

Hope the review got it right.  Amazing (9 out of 10 score) sounds good to me.

Agreed except for his harsh criticism of the naval invasion process...doesn't bode well for the USA war with Japan in the Pacific.  He calls the naval invasion piece "borderline abominable".
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 10:03:56 AM
Installing now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 10:05:32 AM
Installing now.

Nothing personal, but I hate you.

 ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 10:08:08 AM
Small install footprint.  1.68 GB or so.  Damn it, I had stuff I was supposed to do today.....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 06, 2016, 10:08:59 AM
Like play HOI IV
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 10:51:32 AM
 :2funny:

(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q499/wmar1967/Game%20Screenies/Snap1_zps1lm6c7r6.jpg) (http://s1160.photobucket.com/user/wmar1967/media/Game%20Screenies/Snap1_zps1lm6c7r6.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 06, 2016, 10:58:08 AM
We loathe you JD.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on June 06, 2016, 11:00:06 AM
IGN Review:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/06/06/1558481

Hope the review got it right.  Amazing (9 out of 10 score) sounds good to me.

Agreed except for his harsh criticism of the naval invasion process...doesn't bode well for the USA war with Japan in the Pacific.  He calls the naval invasion piece "borderline abominable".

Hopefully, the problem is just the interface as he suggests.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 06, 2016, 11:01:01 AM
Oh, what do these computer games do to us, eh?

 :)  Yeah, it's kinda unhealthy.  But then, so are many of the best things in life (to wit: alcohol.  Or donuts).

What about them both, at the same time??  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 11:04:43 AM
Not sure I'd intentionally mix alcohol and donuts. But I get the sense that plenty of us around here have been known, on occasion, to mix alcohol and gaming.   :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 06, 2016, 11:11:08 AM
I admit I'm waiting for some of you lucky souls to post your initial thoughts on the installation process and fist impressions. As much as I'm an impulse buyer, too many releases in the past have left me burnt a little.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 11:16:39 AM
Hasty impressions so far.

I don't like change!


Map is very slick.  Looks almost like a TW map when zoomed in close.


I like some of the changes they've made to the interface by consolidating information onto one screen.


I like that the development of ships, armour, and aircraft are now presented as developing specific platforms such as a Hurricane or a Spitfire.  I hope they add more detail though as it seems like there aren't enough steps right now.  (They need more Spitfire variants for example.)

I miss the tiny, incremental developments from HOI3 such as being able to add a new, better gun to an existing tank.  Taking a T-34 from a 76mm to an 85mm for example.

I don't like the fact that they've taken out the names of actual weapons from the infantry and replaced it with generic "weapons level II".  I found it much more immersive when I knew my guys had gone from say Springfields to Garands.

Consolidating the information screens means some important information is missing in some cases.  I don't like the fact that you can't see which raw materials you are deficient in when you open the trade screen.  In order to find out, you have to jump back to your production screen.

There is a lot of blank space on the top bar on the main UI map page.  It would be nice to have raw materials listed there.

There needs to be a weather forecast screen and map button!  Adding dynamic, animated weather to the map sounded like a cool idea, but from what I've seen of it so far, I don't like it.  Much of the weather information doesn't show up when you're at certain levels of zoom and if you're running at high time acceleration, it doesn't update properly.

Same goes for air ops.  Not enough information presented on the map.  At high time acceleration, the animated planes on the map don't sync up with day/night cycles, etc.

I don't like the way they organize information on the army info tab.  It doesn't show how battles are progressing and doesn't really group units in a logical way.  Too hard to find out who's where and how they're holding up in a fight at a quick glance.


Hopefully there are ways to tweak the information that I just haven't figured out yet.  If not, I'm sure the modders will get on it.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Wolfe1759 on June 06, 2016, 11:31:18 AM
My discounted purchase from CDKeys seems to have worked.

Installing now  :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 06, 2016, 11:35:49 AM
Installed. Played Tutorial. Now loaded '39 scenario as Germany. Wow...easy to be over-enthusiastic but this is looking fantastic.
Stumbled a bit setting up battle plans but got it now. Loving setting up my army groups/corps. Not a problem as I thought it may be after losing the old OOB, in fact, this is better.
Note: click on colour tab and you can change army symbols and colour of groups.
This so far feels like the most immersive WW2 game I've played. Bit overwhelmed by new screens etc but this is par for the course with any new game.
Love the map. Like the day/night cycle and colours remind me of PS1 Medal of Honor games for some reason. Loving everything so far.

I like how you generate air aces and can assign them to airfields. This is wonderful. Happy. Poor Fiancťe will have to make do with Netflix for the next week.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 11:42:27 AM
SDR -- there is a way to make incremental improvements to things like tanks -- doing so will create new variants, so upgunning a Panzer III will create a Panzer IIIA (yeah, not historical, but you get the picture). You can also create tank destroyer and assault guns based on the tank chassis -- so unlocking Panzer III also opens a route to built StuG III, etc.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 11:45:22 AM
Cool!  Good to know.


I've finished stomping around at the Italians in the tutorial and beyond.  Now it's off to defend the Empire....maybe.  I think I might start with France again, just to get a feel for the new mechanics before trying to manage the UK.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 06, 2016, 12:06:42 PM
I'm getting upset at these big games coming out with NO manual. Stellaris and not HOI IV. If I buy from someone else besides steam, is there a manual

Edit: found the wiki and, from what I gather, the Manual may come out 3-4 weeks after release? I really hate that. I love manuals and hoped companies would go the way of Matrix in creating a huge hard-bound manual (for extra $) for big releases

Anyway, wiki:

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Hearts_of_Iron_4_Wiki
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 12:55:49 PM
IGN Review:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/06/06/1558481

Hope the review got it right.  Amazing (9 out of 10 score) sounds good to me.

Agreed except for his harsh criticism of the naval invasion process...doesn't bode well for the USA war with Japan in the Pacific.  He calls the naval invasion piece "borderline abominable".

Hopefully, the problem is just the interface as he suggests.

Agreed....I remain optimistic...!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 12:56:30 PM
My discounted purchase from CDKeys seems to have worked.

Installing now  :)

Me too....just started the download now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 12:59:53 PM
You guys are killing me.   :buck2:

3PM ... must hold out for 2 more hours ...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 01:07:10 PM
Just found the first Workshop mod I'll be installing --

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698665197&searchtext= (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698665197&searchtext=)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 06, 2016, 01:11:23 PM
Man, the Paradox forums are...."loud"
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 03:17:52 PM
I'm getting upset at these big games coming out with NO manual. Stellaris and not HOI IV. If I buy from someone else besides steam, is there a manual

Edit: found the wiki and, from what I gather, the Manual may come out 3-4 weeks after release? I really hate that. I love manuals and hoped companies would go the way of Matrix in creating a huge hard-bound manual (for extra $) for big releases

Anyway, wiki:

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Hearts_of_Iron_4_Wiki
Agreed about the big bound manual for big games. I'd love some reading material to go with this.

Having said that - I wonder how "relevant" the World in Flames manuals are to the game that is now out?

Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 06, 2016, 03:25:20 PM

Agreed except for his harsh criticism of the naval invasion process...doesn't bode well for the USA war with Japan in the Pacific.  He calls the naval invasion piece "borderline abominable".

The reviewer missed the point. Amphib ops don't leave port immediately. You must mouse-over the invasion arrow for the amphib invasion and it tells you how many days the force must prepare for before they embark. Also, you must have naval superiority in the area. Full details how it works here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRkkqv6B7I8

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on June 06, 2016, 03:43:18 PM
I am interested finding out how the strategic AI is. 

HOI III had good operational level AI. 

But the strategic level AI had some real brain dead moments.  Like the Brits sending every last soldier down to defend against a German invasion of Spain...leaving Britain wide open for attack.  Or the Soviet AI not defending the border with Turkey when Turkey joins the Axis. 

Hopefully this kind of stuff is fixed....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 04:24:30 PM

Agreed except for his harsh criticism of the naval invasion process...doesn't bode well for the USA war with Japan in the Pacific.  He calls the naval invasion piece "borderline abominable".

The reviewer missed the point. Amphib ops don't leave port immediately. You must mouse-over the invasion arrow for the amphib invasion and it tells you how many days the force must prepare for before they embark. Also, you must have naval superiority in the area. Full details how it works here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRkkqv6B7I8

Thanks for the link IC.....!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 06, 2016, 05:02:16 PM
It has already won me over...the fastest loading Paradox game ever for me:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 05:17:22 PM
Got about 4 hours into it so far.  I'm still in the learning/frustration phase of things at this point but it's just not grabbing me the way I'd hoped.  I came to HOI3 very late so it was already well fleshed out with DLC and had a lot of the rough edges taken off.   HOI4 feels a little to bare bones at the moment and I feel like I'm spending a lot of time hunting for info (where are the post battle reports?) or fighting the interface  (why does the battle planner AI insist on marching all my divisions into a single province along the French/Belgian border when I drew what is meant to be a defensive front line and I want broad coverage?).

I'll keep plugging away at it but I think I may just shelve it for now and come back once it's been fixed up.


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 06, 2016, 05:23:09 PM
I've never played any HoI game (except Darkest Hour for an hour, but I wasn't very patient).

Reading the Paradox forums I see a lot of comments from HoI vets saying it's way too easy,"dumbed down" and the AI sucks...etc, etc...

I'm gathering their forums are going to be a little more toxic (it's my opinion from the little time I've spent there), but it's making me wonder if I should hold off on the game.

I'll just sit back and watch this thread a little longer as I find this forums posters full of nothing but well thought out impressions/reviews, etc...

Maybe if it's dumbed down it might be a little easier for a novice such as myself.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 05:26:46 PM
OK...basic but perhaps stupid question. How do I turn on the mini-map for quick movement around the world? I am assuming there is one!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 05:45:29 PM
I haven't been able to find one either.  I'm also hoping there's a single screen option out there somewhere that gives you breakdowns for alliances/relationships/etc so you can do stuff like arrange embargoes and whatnot.  I don't think there is one.  I haven't seen any option for exports or money.  Not sure how that'll affect things like submarine warfare.  Hope they add espionage in a DLC as well. I'm missing that aspect.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 06, 2016, 05:53:43 PM
OK...basic but perhaps stupid question. How do I turn on the mini-map for quick movement around the world? I am assuming there is one!!

Don't believe it exists
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 06, 2016, 06:36:09 PM
Hmm. Based your comments, there are lots of missing pieces.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 06, 2016, 07:08:13 PM
OK...basic but perhaps stupid question. How do I turn on the mini-map for quick movement around the world? I am assuming there is one!!

Don't believe it exists

That's a head-scratcher of an omission for a game that covers the entire planet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 06, 2016, 07:21:11 PM
Hmm. Based your comments, there are lots of missing pieces.

Seems that way.  I put a bit of time into it, but I'm not liking what I see so far. The feel I'm getting is more like early HoI1 than a game with lessons learned from HoI3. 

On the fence about pushing forward and considering a Steam return.  I'm sure that a lot of things will be changed in the future by an almost never ending stream of mini-DLC packs, ala EU 4.  I'm not certain I am going to sign on for the long haul on that.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 06, 2016, 07:32:01 PM
Besides the missing Minimap, what specifically are all these other missing pieces?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: dinsdale on June 06, 2016, 07:40:03 PM
I've never played any HoI game (except Darkest Hour for an hour, but I wasn't very patient).

Reading the Paradox forums I see a lot of comments from HoI vets saying it's way too easy,"dumbed down" and the AI sucks...etc, etc...

I'm gathering their forums are going to be a little more toxic (it's my opinion from the little time I've spent there), but it's making me wonder if I should hold off on the game.

I'll just sit back and watch this thread a little longer as I find this forums posters full of nothing but well thought out impressions/reviews, etc...

Maybe if it's dumbed down it might be a little easier for a novice such as myself.
I dont have the game, but I would recommend you ignore the Paradox forums. There are loads of great people there, but there's always an outcry whenever a game is released, then numerous factions bickering with each other in every discussion. It used to be more civil (or maybe Im just nostalgic) but the divided opinion and religious devotion to its great vs it sucks has been this way since EU1.


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 06, 2016, 07:55:51 PM
Yea, so after spending a few hours glancing the Paradox forums I'm just not going to ask any specific questions. There seems to be more arguing and name calling than anything else. I've watched quite a few videos of the game and it looks really nice, but I'm a little gun shy right now. My gaming budget is tight these days  :-[

,
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 08:21:16 PM
What I feel is missing.

1)  Battle reports.  You don't get any information when a battle ends informing you of casualties suffered, etc.

2)  Weather reports.   They've added dynamic weather on a province by province basis but there's no easy way to get a general weather picture for a theatre front.

3)  Trade.  Seems really stripped down.  There doesn't seem to be any currency anymore nor any real way to handle exports so you don't have the option of favouring trade or embargoing countries.

4)  Espionage.  It's missing.  You can get a little bit of information regarding other nations by developing decryption tech but other than that, the map is complete FOW.

5)  Battle tabs.  There's no quick tab option to select various battles your units might be fighting in.  You have to manually scroll around the map in order to select them to see what's going on.  Makes it hard to shuttle reinforcements to needed sectors.

6)  Fuel and supplies seem to be missing from the air war aspect entirely.  Removes a lot of the granularity.

7)  Clickable mini-map.

8)  Better historical information on unit composition.  In HOI 3, you could click on an infantry division and it'd give you names of actual weapons for infantry, anti-tank, support, etc so you might see Garand M1, Bazooka, BAR.  Here, there's nothing.  Just weapons I, weapons II....  Also, there aren't enough discrete levels of tech to develop here.  In HOI 3, you might have 10 levels of a tech you could develop and you'd see gradual improvements.  Your Halifax night bomber might improve from Gee, to H2S, to Oboe target locations.  Here, there are only 4 levels if development so the jumps from level to level feel huge and the amount of resources it takes to upgrade your units can kill your production queue. 

9)  Missing historical vehicles.  There is an option to improve a base unit such as a Spitfire if you have enough experience but rather than getting real world unit improvements such as Spitfire MkI -->  MkII  ---> Mk Vb --> Mk IX.

10)  Diplomacy screens.  There should be one screen showing the alliances and which nations are in or gravitating towards each of the three main forces, Axis, Communists, Allies.   It's available on a country by country basis but not globally.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 06, 2016, 09:17:19 PM
Well, just got to spend a few hours with it, and my initial impressions are overwhelmingly positive. I understand a lot of the reservations being expressed here and I certainly share some of them. But overall -- and it is a first impression, though one I will be amazed if I wind up revising significantly -- overall, this seems like a quantum leap beyond HOI3.

I can't agree with the opinion of some (esp. in Pdox forums) that HOI4 is somehow 'dumbed down.' I just don't see it. Streamlined yes, and very much in ways that are improvements.

The things that make me most giddy are the things I was most looking forward to:  the Battle planner, and the new production system. I LOVE that production is now based on actually building weapons and vehicles to *fill out* divisions, etc., rather than 'manufacturing' divisions themselves. And heaven be praised, production sliders are gone!!!!!  I also like that we're no longer just stockpiling resources, since that was always easy to game in HOI3 and by '39 I never faced resource shortages playing as the major powers.

I've only fiddled with the Battle plans so far, and I love their potential. The UI is a bit fussy and unintuitive, and will take some getting used to. But once I master this, I am never going to micro my units again. I basically tried to use the AI-army control in HOI3 to do exactly this -- create plans that the AI would then carry out, and ideally not have to move units myself. This never really worked in HOI3 but I'm hopeful the Battle Planner will be intricate enough to allow this.

I like the streamlined tech tree -- I always thought research in HOI3 was painfully dull and more a chore than something that added real interest to the game. And I like the more elaborate national focuses, which nicely guide your country's long-term strategy.

Love the division designer. Tempted to use the mod on the Steam Workshop that allows you to design whatever formations you want without having to use the 'army experience' mechanic, which seems a bit arbitrary and a-historical anyway.

Happy that espionage is gone -- at least, espionage as it existed in HOI3, which was essentially pointless. Like weather, something you could completely ignore and suffer no negative effects for it. Ideally, I'd love an interesting, robust intelligence/espionage element in HOI4 and hope that maybe expansions can provide that. But if the choice was more of the same of HOI3's espionage and nothing, I'll gladly take nothing.

Love the abstraction of the air forces. HOI3's handling of the airwar was mostly tedious micromanagement. Not sure yet how HOI4's system will play out in practice, but again, an example of good streamlining, in my view.

Again, not dismissing the concerns and criticisms that you guys are making here. Like I say, I agree with many of your points. But I honestly don't feel the slightest disappointment with HOI4, based on my first few hours with it. Just hugely excited to put in the time to learn the game better now.  !
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 06, 2016, 09:24:32 PM
Ok so HOI turned into a broad military war game rather than a "country simulator" (less trade, diplomacy, espionage, streamlined economics).

I actually like the improvements done on fighting the war.  Will miss country mechanics.  Still worth a try.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 09:28:00 PM
Glad you're enjoying it.  The air war, fiddling with production sliders, and espionage were aspects that I really enjoyed in HOI III.  Testament to the amount of play that the game offered that we both enjoy the series based on completely different aspects of what the game offers.

I'm also finding the planner to be rather unintuitive.  All I want to do is have the French border manned with defensive works and enough troops to garrison each border province and have a series of reserves in centralized clusters behind the lines to be able to rush forward and fill in gaps but getting the planner to let me do that is proving to be a real headache.  I think I've got it figured out but it would have been fewer steps just to manually place all my units.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 06, 2016, 10:31:31 PM
Yea, so after spending a few hours glancing the Paradox forums I'm just not going to ask any specific questions. There seems to be more arguing and name calling than anything else....

Tread carefully around the Paradox forums. It's relatively easy to get banned there. At least it used to be.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on June 06, 2016, 10:56:03 PM
Still just getting into it...but so far I like the interface.  As a grognard wargamer who cut my teeth on old AH and SPI games, I quickly got over the fact that the interface dumps a lot of wargame convention.  IMHO it is the best Pdox interface yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 11:33:08 PM
SDR

Battle Tabs - I haven't had any time on it (been trying to play CAP2) but I was sure I saw a guy assigning reinforcements by selecting the unit and click or right clicking on the army tab at the bottom of the screen.

I watched a few videos of Quills and I'm sure I saw him do that. He was also being careful to name his armies so he could see at a glance (or was he naming is fronts? - I think it was his armies as he was tying those to fronts.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 11:36:30 PM
What I mean by battle tabs is like in HOI III.  You could bring up a list on the right hand side of the screen and it would put up a colour-coded icon with a percentile number in it giving you an overall idea of how each battle was progressing.  You could click on the icon and it'd take you right to the fight.  As far as I know, that's not an available option in HOI IV.  In order to find each fight, you have to either open up the entire army list and click on units from there or scroll across the map and find battles that way.  As I'm currently fighting in France, N. Africa, and Vietnam, it's a bit of a hassle hopping around from fight to fight.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 06, 2016, 11:46:00 PM
I'm guessing here - but what about clicking the Theatres? On the right side of the screen?

Like I say, I have no time in it yet, but I'm trying to think back to a couple of videos I watched.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 06, 2016, 11:55:11 PM
Yes, it's doable but I'd personally prefer to have that info readily available at one click from the main map.  I think I might be fighting the interface here but my natural inclination is to micro-manage my units and control them all myself.  When I resort to the battle planner, I often find myself getting pissed off at the stupid moves the AI makes, especially on the defensive.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 07, 2016, 12:01:33 AM
ah - ok.

I guess there is always an element of interface change and good and bad opinions of those changes.

I sometimes think "Why did they take that away? It was very helpful" when I get a new version of an old favourite.

Personally, I specifically stayed away from loading HoI III in order to avoid any confusion between interfaces. It also helps me avoid the frustrations of knowing one game had a helpful feature that is now not there (or at least not evident).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 07, 2016, 12:41:53 AM
I like the Air Force abstraction. 

Totally fine with the spy changes. 

The tech tree I feel is fine and better than HoI3 , but I still prefer the one from HoI2.

Interface is very very solid. 

I like the IDEA of the battle planner.

I do not like the loss of OOB's.  I understand the HQ/OOB thing in HoI3 was needlessly complicated, but I don't like that it is for all intents and purposes gone. 

I miss battle reports. 

I feel like, and I may change my opinion, that things have degenerated to drawing big stacks of doom around like HoI1 and HoI2.  I get that it's not really that bad, but that's the feel I get, and I just remember that impression from the early games and don't like it in this one. 

Hate the loss of counters. 

I don't know, I'm just not feeling it.  I hate that, I was deeply looking forward to this.  I did early closed Historicity Beta on HoI1 and worked on the WW1 mod for HoI2, so this series is very, very close to me.  I'm just not, for some reason, feeling this one.  I've stopped playing short of the Steam refund limit, and am mulling my options.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 07, 2016, 02:13:46 AM
Uuuuugh I wanna play this but I got a thesis to write in a week. Plus I wanna do videos but youtube is already oversaturated with em.

I booted up the game and OH MY GOD THERES AN ATTEMPT AT A TUTORIAL THATS NOT HALFASS
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: salazarus on June 07, 2016, 02:27:02 AM
I'm on the fence. Some things I like other I hate. I don't mind simpler economy and country managing. I also like how production works. I like the idea behind battle planer but I hate how It has been implemented. It doesn't feel intuitive and It's too complicated. I don't have enough control over combat and micromanaging doesn't feel right. It is also to chaotic and hard to follow. I like the air war. For me combat was the most important part of HoI and they dumbed down it too much.
I also hate the map it's too fancy, I want something simple and readable. I hate the loss of counter. When the war starts it is hard to follow the sprites. Often I don't know where exactly are my divisions and what are they doing.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 07, 2016, 03:30:40 AM
When people say that counters aren't there, thought I saw an option in the preferences to use NATO counters, are you meaning something different?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 07, 2016, 03:34:59 AM
I didn't get a ton of time to play yet, just part of the tutorial and messing around, but so far I kind of like the streamlined approach.  I could never play the past versions because I would get lost in all the details and micromanagement, then give up.  So far I don't feel that way with this version.  I completely understand others enjoyed the details and might miss them, but this is looking like the first version I can actually keep up with.  Time will tell. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 07, 2016, 05:00:05 AM
I've read all the negatives but none of them affects my view that this is a great initial release. Really fun, great immersion and it can only get better.

I've found there are a lot of options 'hiding in plain sight', so it pays to mouse over every button, every window tag. You might miss something important you never knew was there. I keep getting pleasantly surprised by just how much is on offer here.


Some things are not apparent so some tips for the bewildered (I'm one of these):

Game Difficulty. It defaults to the easiest level. I've seen a few people rush in and them complain it's too easy. It is, because they didn't change the difficulty level for their game start.

Paradrops. You have to use the war plan toolbar. Mouse over the paradrop icon for how to conduct one.

Troop naval transport: just select troops and click on destination. They will acquire transports from your convoy pool. I haven't figured on how to naval escort transports -or do we have to? anyone?

Strategic Transport (Trains) click on the railtrack icon above your troops before clicking on destination.

Division Equipment. When creating new division templates: click on 'Division Equipment'. You can then choose to outfit Divisions with obsolete stockpiled equipment if you like. Perfect for UK Home Guards, Volkssturm or colonial forces. Be careful: changing equipment for an existing template will change ALL those divisions in the field. Click on 'duplicate' to create an entirely new template to avoid this. The benefits of creating new divisions can be to outfit specific fronts with worse or better equipped troops.

Reserve Divisions. Yes, it's possible to create them, if you mean very low starting strength and poorly trained. Just queue up new divisions and them instantly deploy them, and set priority reinforcement etc. to the lowest. They'll appear with hardly any strength and as raw recruits. When you need them, update their priority and begin training them.

Aces. You can promote air aces for individual air wings.

Mixed Air Wings. You can create air wings with mixed aircraft types.

Espionage. Click on national flag of a country and select the 'details' tab. Gives more info on their forces etc.

Naval Unit Battle History. Click on a naval force and the 'notepad' icon to the right of each ship if it has one. Will give a detailed list of sinkings and assisted sinkings.

Naval Split-Off. You can click a button on the naval group's GUI to have any damaged units split off, repair at nearest port, then re-attach, all automatically.







Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 07, 2016, 05:22:29 AM
I've found there are a lot of options 'hiding in plain sight', so it pays to mouse over every button, every window tag. You might miss something important you never knew was there. I keep getting pleasantly surprised by just how much is on offer here.

All this because there's no manual?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 07, 2016, 05:34:02 AM

All this because there's no manual?

Yes, I know. I'm posting through necessity and I'm with you all 100% on this. It's not like they are strapped for cash and have only two people in the company that they couldn't write a manual. Why didn't they? Any official reply on this? I'm avoiding the extremism of their forums...


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 07, 2016, 07:41:47 AM
I'm on the fence too, but not because I've played any of the HoI games. From what I'm reading a "new" player to this series should enjoy the game. Seems like a lot of the vets are so-so with it or do not like the changes.

I'm seeing the game for $25-30 so I might just pull the trigger  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 07, 2016, 07:44:06 AM
When Hearts of Iron IV and all its DLC is priced at 75% off, I will buy it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 07, 2016, 07:56:11 AM

All this because there's no manual?

Yes, I know. I'm posting through necessity and I'm with you all 100% on this. It's not like they are strapped for cash and have only two people in the company that they couldn't write a manual. Why didn't they? Any official reply on this? I'm avoiding the extremism of their forums...

Most probably because a lot of the game mechanics will be changed along the way.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 07, 2016, 08:08:28 AM
nevermind  :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 07, 2016, 08:13:24 AM
Just thinking a bit more about SDR's informative post. Added some comments --

What I feel is missing.

1)  Battle reports.  You don't get any information when a battle ends informing you of casualties suffered, etc.

Agree -- we need more feedback


2)  Weather reports.   They've added dynamic weather on a province by province basis but there's no easy way to get a general weather picture for a theatre front.

This, and also from what I've read, weather doesn't seem to be much of a factor in combat. This was the case in HOI3 as well. I hope this will change -- weather has never gotten the attention it deserves in HOI. Also I can't tell if the day/night cycle really alters anything? I see units happily fighting throughout the night without any negative modifier I can see? Also needs fixing.


3)  Trade.  Seems really stripped down.  There doesn't seem to be any currency anymore nor any real way to handle exports so you don't have the option of favouring trade or embargoing countries.

Linking the trade to civilian factories is an odd decision. I can't figure out if it's possible to *export* your own resources? Or if other nations ask you for trades? In general I really like the expanded emphasis on key resources (tungsten, chromium etc.) as opposed to the vague 'rare materials' of HOI3. But there's more potential to this system that hopefully will get fleshed out in time.

4)  Espionage.  It's missing.  You can get a little bit of information regarding other nations by developing decryption tech but other than that, the map is complete FOW.

I've always been of the mind that there's not nearly enough FOW in HOI. In general, I'd love to see intelligence gathering play a far greater role, but I think average players would lose their s**t if faced with added difficulty of correctly locating and ID'ing enemy units...  It also seems like some of the traditional espionage features are now folded into the diplomacy screen -- using influence to support you party or initiate a coup, etc.

5)  Battle tabs.  There's no quick tab option to select various battles your units might be fighting in.  You have to manually scroll around the map in order to select them to see what's going on.  Makes it hard to shuttle reinforcements to needed sectors.

Agree 100%

6)  Fuel and supplies seem to be missing from the air war aspect entirely.  Removes a lot of the granularity.

This doesn't bother me so much, as I'm very much in favor of what HOI4 has done to abstract air combat.

7)  Clickable mini-map.

Never used it myself.

8)  Better historical information on unit composition.  In HOI 3, you could click on an infantry division and it'd give you names of actual weapons for infantry, anti-tank, support, etc so you might see Garand M1, Bazooka, BAR.  Here, there's nothing.  Just weapons I, weapons II....  Also, there aren't enough discrete levels of tech to develop here.  In HOI 3, you might have 10 levels of a tech you could develop and you'd see gradual improvements.  Your Halifax night bomber might improve from Gee, to H2S, to Oboe target locations.  Here, there are only 4 levels if development so the jumps from level to level feel huge and the amount of resources it takes to upgrade your units can kill your production queue. 

Funny -- another point where I like HOI4's abstraction. Particularly with infantry, in HOI3, it always bugged me that we would 'research' things like the MP40, and that when you got more info on your divisions, it would say "MP40" as the div's main 'weapon', as though the entire infantry division was kitted out with this firearm. Just struck me as absurd.

9)  Missing historical vehicles.  There is an option to improve a base unit such as a Spitfire if you have enough experience but rather than getting real world unit improvements such as Spitfire MkI -->  MkII  ---> Mk Vb --> Mk IX.

I think you can add that flavor yourself if you want to -- i.e. when you upgrade the Spitfire, you can give it the name "Spitfire MkII".

10)  Diplomacy screens.  There should be one screen showing the alliances and which nations are in or gravitating towards each of the three main forces, Axis, Communists, Allies.   It's available on a country by country basis but not globally.

Agree.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 07, 2016, 08:37:51 AM
Maybe it was because I was a few pints in when my naval war in the Med started in earnest last night, but I found trying to find my fleets and determine what was going on to be somewhat confusing.  It's sometimes hard to locate your ships with all the animated stuff happening, especially if a lot of AI fleets from other nations are also involved in the fight.  The post-battle naval screen break down needs to be cleaned up as well.  Personally, I don't really need information on what percentage of damage dealt and delivered came from each ship or plane.  I'd rather just see who was sunk, who's not, and how badly damaged the surviving ships are. 

Sandman,

Looks like exports are handled automatically.  If another nation needs goods, it looks like you'll export them.  I'm currently exporting 2 units of tungsten to the Netherlands.  I'm not sure if relationship status plays a part in this or not.  I can't even remember where I saw this but I think it was on the trade screen when I hovered over one of the commodities.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: tgb on June 07, 2016, 08:53:47 AM

I'm seeing the game for $25-30 so I might just pull the trigger  O0

Where?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 07, 2016, 08:57:29 AM
Sandman,

Looks like exports are handled automatically.  If another nation needs goods, it looks like you'll export them.  I'm currently exporting 2 units of tungsten to the Netherlands.  I'm not sure if relationship status plays a part in this or not.  I can't even remember where I saw this but I think it was on the trade screen when I hovered over one of the commodities.

Thanks. Yes, you're right. Appears from the the Wiki that relationship does have some effect on trade, as do your 'trade laws' --

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Trade (http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Trade)

It's a system that will take some getting used to.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 07, 2016, 09:01:47 AM

I'm seeing the game for $25-30 so I might just pull the trigger  O0

Where?


From a poster several pages above...

I just purchased HoI4 for $29.99 at green man gaming using the code of JUNE25. That's a 25% coupon.

I'm trying to find the site, but I think I saw it for $25 elsewhere....checking
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: steve58 on June 07, 2016, 09:13:04 AM
Looks like Imperialgames has the current cheapest price ($29.20).  I've never used them (but HOI4 is really tempting me).  Seems they are Canadian so maybe one of the Canadians on the forums here can comment on them.

https://isthereanydeal.com/#/page:game/info?plain=heartsofironivcadetedition
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 07, 2016, 09:21:08 AM
Looks like Imperialgames has the current cheapest price ($29.20).  I've never used them (but HOI4 is really tempting me).  Seems they are Canadian so maybe one of the Canadians on the forums here can comment on them.

https://isthereanydeal.com/#/page:game/info?plain=heartsofironivcadetedition

Never heard of Imperialgames....  ???
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: steve58 on June 07, 2016, 09:34:41 AM
Looks like Imperialgames has the current cheapest price ($29.20).  I've never used them (but HOI4 is really tempting me).  Seems they are Canadian so maybe one of the Canadians on the forums here can comment on them.

https://isthereanydeal.com/#/page:game/info?plain=heartsofironivcadetedition

Never heard of Imperialgames....  ???

They are fairly new, but seem to have a good rep from what I see on the internetz...

Quote
Imperial Games is the first online PC games retailer based in Canada. It launched at the end of 2015, backed by a team of experienced IT and video games specialists.

We aim to provide customers with the very best possible experience. No gimmicks, no bullsh*t. Our customer service and loyalty programs are all aimed towards a perfect, seamless and satisfying experience.

If you have a problem or any kind of issue concerning any aspect of our website or services, we urge you to contact us as quickly as possible so we can make it right.

https://www.imperialgames.com/en/1010/about-us
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Nefaro on June 07, 2016, 09:36:02 AM
When Hearts of Iron IV and all its DLC is priced at 75% off, I will buy it.

I'm with ya, brother.

HOIs have always had issues.  The AI, and it's lack of naval invasion coherence, being just the tip.  Wasn't the least surprised it had been delayed, which is probably a great thing, but I'd be very surprised if it still didn't need a good amount of refinement. 

Plus.. I don't really expect a well-conducted Pacific War to ever be a thing, and that's where I usually placed the most interest in the HOI series.  To be fair, that seems to be the ever-elusive gold sharting unicorn of WW2 grand strategy games.  Few, if any, have been able to model it well.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 07, 2016, 09:50:20 AM
I think I'm going to join the "I'm going to wait until they tweak the game" before I buy. I'm pretty sure sales of the game can be found a few months from now.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 07, 2016, 10:52:45 AM

All this because there's no manual?

Yes, I know. I'm posting through necessity and I'm with you all 100% on this. It's not like they are strapped for cash and have only two people in the company that they couldn't write a manual. Why didn't they? Any official reply on this? I'm avoiding the extremism of their forums...

Most probably because a lot of the game mechanics will be changed along the way.

This.  I didn't get EU 3 until 3 or 4 years after it came out, then got a package with a bunch of expansions.  Trying to figure out how to play I got seriously stymied from the start because the very first paragraph in the manual just . . . wasn't true.  Those buttons they described weren't there, or if they were, they didn't work that way.

I remember with the early EUs raging because the manuals were so bad, but I have eventually come to realize that you just to figure out how to play some other way with Paradox games.  I can't fault them for not putting much work into a manual when it is going to have a limited shelf life due to patching that changes gameplay.

Fortunately, the Youtube videos, wikis and Paradox forums contain abundant answers.  Folks on the forum tend to be relatively kind to newbies because everybody realizes you have to figure out how to play somehow.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 07, 2016, 10:58:48 AM
Under options, there is a box labeled "Use NATO symbols" and right below it there's one labeled "Pause on notifications" and I've checked them both and nothing has changed. I've attempted to implement both during a game and while starting a new game with no joy.... am I doing something wrong?

Another thing that's bugging me is that  I can't figure out a way to disband whole units with a single click, instead it appears that you have to open up the unit and disband each sub-unit individually. That is just a touch tedious if you're trying to, as the USA, get rid of all your S-boats. That's a lot of subs to get rid of if you have to do it one at a time. Again, am I missing something obvious?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 07, 2016, 11:38:57 AM
Looks like Italy got a new flag...


(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v320/bogaty/hoi4_zpsaq4ldhgj.jpg~original)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 07, 2016, 12:01:59 PM
Thanks for the link IC.....!

You're welcome!


Support Attack
I found that if you attack with a force from one region and you have friendly forces next to the region you are attacking, they automatically join in to support your attack if able. Note that all forces were in the same theatre group and the same army. It may work with allied forces in other groups.

See Allied Battle Plans
You can see allied AI Battle Plans if you check one of the the little boxes on bottom right of screen. This is very useful for supporting them and in fact, it's preferable IMO to setting up plans and the AI not supporting you, as in HOI 3.

And without the aid of a manual the detective work continues...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 07, 2016, 02:06:37 PM
I've been reading on the Paradox forums that people are playing as minor nations and holding out well against major powers. One person claimed they were playing as Latvia and holding their own against Russia by 1944. Of course, he/she could be full of dog doo-doo, but if that's true, that's a little disheartening.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 07, 2016, 02:44:17 PM
I have been poking around on it but honestly the lack of the manual is really off putting.  I dont have a lot of spare time during the day to play (but I can spend time reading).  I have started and stopped three games because of not knowing how to do simple tasks like transferring planes to wrong theater, not able to stop embarked troops from going to the wrong selected port.  Not having newly arrived troops attach themselves to an existing army.  Honestly these are basic things that even a quick start guide could address and is just plain frustrating when trying to get a game going.

I think once I understand it I will be satisfied with the game and the mechanics but it does piss me off that they by omission have steepened the learning curve for no value to playing enjoyment.

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 07, 2016, 03:52:52 PM
I've been reading on the Paradox forums that people are playing as minor nations and holding out well against major powers. One person claimed they were playing as Latvia and holding their own against Russia by 1944. Of course, he/she could be full of dog doo-doo, but if that's true, that's a little disheartening.

A lot of people claim a lot of things, some may or may not be true....and who knows how they played it...with historical settings?  easy mode? etc.  Although I read Paradox forums for the occasional helpful tip, I don't put much stock into all the hate....again, may be true....but I don't notice much of what other people say, maybe because I am not that good at it...don't know.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 07, 2016, 04:14:26 PM
**Nevermind***
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: -budd- on June 07, 2016, 07:25:12 PM
I'm with the 75% off crowd. I havent tried HOI since number one. I like the idea of the game but like a few other games i own i would probably open it up and stare at it, then quit. Hopefully this one is more approachable without being too simplified. So far i'm 0 for 4 on paradox games, probably just gamer ADD.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 07, 2016, 07:42:12 PM
I think I've played it enough to become reasonably familiar with the new interface and the way things are meant to work.  Sadly, I've concluded that this version of HOI is simply not for me as I'm just not enjoying myself and I don't feel any of the sense of immersion that I got from the previous versions.  I cannot stand the way air and naval combat are handled.  They abstracted them far too much, supposedly in the name of streamlining the game but I find that they're a chaotic mess and it requires far more effort to constantly hop between the screens just to get a sense of what the hell is happening at any given time.  It's even more frustrating because they've stripped much of the player's ability to control this process.  I hate the fact that your planes and ships spread out over an entire region once combat kicks off and there's no easy way to spot them on a map and tell what's going on with them.   

Hopefully it'll get better down the road but until that time, I'm done with it.  Really wish I hadn't bought this one.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 07, 2016, 07:48:07 PM
I appreciate all the forum goers here who bought the game and have taken the time to give their opinions......they've saved me $30+
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 07, 2016, 08:21:04 PM
In agreement with SDR very sadly.  I did the Steam Refund this evening after coming up to the time limit and watching a lot of Lets Plays.  I haven't really let the Paradox forums persuade me as they tend to sometimes be a den of negativity.

I think the real thing that it came down to was just the feeling that I wasn't doing much.  Sure, I could micromanage and give individual orders, but that actually didn't seem to be the best option given how much emphasis is put in having the AI control things.   The removal of simple things like letting you know when battles were over makes micro counter intuitive and more a handicap than just giving things to the AI and letting it fly.  I found myself watching TV in the background while the game was just successfully doing its own thing more than once.

I feel like the game will improve and a lot of the things people feel are "missing" or "not fleshed out" will probably be added, slowly, via paid DLC.  I can already see room for packs that add more layers to the Naval and Air options, and likely "enhancements" that will turn things like "Weapon 1" into "Springfield Rifle".  This just rubs me a bit the wrong way. 

I feel that if you either didn't get the prior HoI games, or never played them, then there's nothing wrong with HoI4 and there's fun to be had with it.  I can't and won't call it a bad game, just not how I like to play grand strategy.  I might rebuy later, when the prices drop and a lot of the very inevitable DLC has been released.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on June 07, 2016, 11:47:10 PM
I played for 5 hours until now, and I almost understood all the mechanism. For me this is not a successor of HOI games not for HOI3 at least, it is a different game, it is not bad it is actually good grand strategy game with more streamlined gameplay. 
HOI3 was for me at least a mixture between the traditional paradox grand strategy and a wargame sort of, with all those detailed OOB, complex mechanism of economy and supplies, many options to operate air wings etc.
I like HOI3 because it was somehow a WW2 simulation, it took me long long time to learn most of the things and after that I enjoyed the strategy layer of it, but everytime I run HOI3 to play a new game i feel lazy to do all those tedious tasks all over again, assigning  generals, armies, division etc, micromanaging the airforce tasks, plus the political, trade and espionage games. However, the good thing about HOI3 that it has an AI control option,which was really cool to assign some armies to the AI and to have the feel that you are a ruler of nation rather than you are basically "god" that controls every single thing, but unfortunately the AI was incompetent and in order to win and be more efficient you have to control them yourself which is very tedious for me in a grand strategy game.   
My point is HOI4 is game that focus to play a pure strategy game that you play as head of nation, the rest of mechanism is abstracted, no AI control but deeply abstracted mechanism. It is enjoyable, it is simplified yes, but the game direction is clear.
If I want to enjoy things in HOI3 and more, which are detailed OBB, deep supply system, generals and accurate equipment name, I would jump to play games like WitE/ WitW, DC:B and AGEOD games.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: salazarus on June 08, 2016, 02:15:30 AM
I did the refund. For me the game is to shallow. In HoI 3 we have too much micromanagement but in HoI 4  they cut too much stuff. I only like how production and divisions building is handled. All other elements are lacking something. After few DLCs the game will be better, but for now it's not worth it. And I think that we will find in DLCs features that should be in the game from the beginning.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 08, 2016, 02:29:50 AM
So much hate eh? 
I was wondering. They were quite transparent about the features through blogs, dev diaries, and World War Wednesday's right? Why still buy with the hopes that there's more to it?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rekim on June 08, 2016, 03:43:56 AM
The release lined up perfectly with my days off.  I managed 15 hours in the first two days. a nod to mother nature for the rain  O0


loving it so far.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Surtur on June 08, 2016, 03:56:22 AM
I started yesterday and got about three hours into the campaign.

I won't miss the OOB from HoI3 too much, but I will mis the more in-depth logistics system. Regarding the national focus system, I am unsure if I love it or hate it.

What makes me optimistic is that it is in a much(!) better shape than when HoI 3 released and with the many DLC will come many improvements, though we will have to pay for these of course.

I only wished I realised that it is hard for democracies to start wars before I turned my Italy into one...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: chemkid on June 08, 2016, 04:07:44 AM
Quote from: panzeroo / BLACK ICE author, yesterday on paradox black ice mod forum
As I have said alot to people both here and in private, the vanilla HOI IV is not my ideal. But it's the future of HOI and so we are going to give it our best efforts to mod it into a game we can obsess over. It's going to take a lot of effort and all your support , but I think we will not let you guys down.

so, there's still hope for the folks waiting to dig their teeth into something 'hardcore'... until then, wait for the 'final' release of BICE for HOI3!

cheers!  :D

source:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi-iv-black-ice.923395/page-12
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 04:19:02 AM
Well this is really bizarre. I've seen so many mixed feelings and yet, with myself as one of the most critical people on the HOI series in the past, I find this version the best so far. After the rough edges have been dealt with, I think this has very great potential.

One of the main gripes is that there is an almost overwhelming deal of info you are bombarded with and there's no manual. This has to be dealt with and a wiki is not the answer. If Paradox updates the game and changes the systems then they should correct the manual, instead of withholding one until they have 'fine tuned' the game.

I think the issue is that people want accessibility but detail. That's a tall order. On one end of the scale, we have Axis & Allies with simple detail and high accessibility and playability. On the other, War in the West/East/War in the Pacific, with extreme detail deep immersion but less simplicity and long turns. Getting that sweet spot in the middle ground to satisfy grognards and more casual WW2 junkies is nigh impossible. However, with HOI4, I feel they have got closer to achieving this. HOI 4 for me is a huge improvement over HOI 2 and HOI 3.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 08, 2016, 04:31:29 AM
I love this game, my only nitpick is that theres no OOB. My god that annoys me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 08, 2016, 04:32:10 AM
Count me in so far....I don't have as much time in yet and experience as other people, but I am liking what see.  As I mentioned before, I am not as hard core as others so maybe that has a lot to do with it, but I find myself much more interested than past versions where I never got far.  And this is only the start so I can only imagine how the game will grow, although I hope it does not turn back into an over complex game for me...unless optional.  Plus, from what I read along the way, not many surprises...pretty much what I expected.

I can completely understand some being disappointed and not liking the direction, but I am guessing the game will have more wide appeal and sell more, which I am sure was the goal of the company.  Sure, there will be countless dlc and expansions, but that is no surprise either and I am ok with that especially when I paid less than $30 for it...bought many other games at a higher price that won't get played as much as this.

Looking forward to the weekend so I can dive much deeper....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 05:05:18 AM
Quote from: panzeroo / BLACK ICE author, yesterday on paradox black ice mod forum
As I have said alot to people both here and in private, the vanilla HOI IV is not my ideal. But it's the future of HOI and so we are going to give it our best efforts to mod it into a game we can obsess over. It's going to take a lot of effort and all your support , but I think we will not let you guys down.

so, there's still hope for the folks waiting to dig their teeth into something 'hardcore'... until then, wait for the 'final' release of BICE for HOI3!

cheers!  :D

source:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi-iv-black-ice.923395/page-12

I love Black Ice. I never went back to HOI 3 vanilla after playing it.

From what I read on that Black Ice thread it appears that many consider the base game too simple. Maybe I'm deluded, but I'll have a go at listing why I like the game so much.

For me, the combat, air and naval systems are the most realistic and immersive yet.

The division designer the deepest yet- you can build a single battalion and upwards. This means that you can create historically accurate units down to the level of a commando/spec forces raiding party. Something you couldn't do with HOI 3.

We have straits. The Royal Navy cant just sail into the Baltic now, because the Denmark straits can be closed. Same with Gibraltar - and axis subs can try to pass.

To stage an amphibious invasion you need proper air and naval superiority (not just on paper but to fulfill the game mechanic for the invasion to occur), giving the German player the same difficulties for mounting operation Sealion, as well as for mounting D-Day, Husky or Torch or theoretically any major invasion. Something you could never do in HOI before.

Strategic warfare is more real and has proper effects.

You have individual ships and planes. The granularity is deep.

OOB - cut down yes, but easier to control. I actually enjoyed taking control of Japan with it's unwieldy Chinese front and nightmare Pacific OOB, which in HOI3, I could and wouldn't do.

The old way of tech research from HOi2 is back, which almost everyone loved.  Simple to use but strategically important and with plenty of options to add tech teams.

You can improve units in a realistic way. Re-equip units. Air Wings can gain air aces. You can mix air unit types in wings.

You can see weather directly on the map, and it's not eye candy, it's game weather that has effects and there's no need for a separate weather map mode, like HOI3.

I had a ton of basic outdated Infantry equipment and used it to create single regiment units, with minimal training, low reinforcement priority and deployed them quickly to defend home areas. In other words, home guard militia. I also build a couple of Marine regiments and trained and equipped them to high heaven. Then I sent them on raids and got intel on troops in an area I was going to invade. In other words, Commando Spec Forces recon. Something you couldn't do in HOI3.

I could go on.

And it's only version 1. No DLC, no major mods yet.

Really, I'm in awe of how many people dislike this game.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Surtur on June 08, 2016, 05:35:34 AM
Great list Ian!

Though I understand people are dissapointed by the fact that airplanes at tanks etc. no longer require fuel to operate.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 08, 2016, 05:52:42 AM
Well this is really bizarre. I've seen so many mixed feelings and yet, with myself as one of the most critical people on the HOI series in the past, I find this version the best so far. After the rough edges have been dealt with, I think this has very great potential.

One of the main gripes is that there is an almost overwhelming deal of info you are bombarded with and there's no manual. This has to be dealt with and a wiki is not the answer. If Paradox updates the game and changes the systems then they should correct the manual, instead of withholding one until they have 'fine tuned' the game.

I think the issue is that people want accessibility but detail. That's a tall order. On one end of the scale, we have Axis & Allies with simple detail and high accessibility and playability. On the other, War in the West/East/War in the Pacific, with extreme detail deep immersion but less simplicity and long turns. Getting that sweet spot in the middle ground to satisfy grognards and more casual WW2 junkies is nigh impossible. However, with HOI4, I feel they have got closer to achieving this. HOI 4 for me is a huge improvement over HOI 2 and HOI 3.

Well written...I agree.  Personally, I've stopped hating games because of what they aren't or what I wish they were, and instead began enjoying them for what they are.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 08, 2016, 05:54:10 AM
I love this game, my only nitpick is that theres no OOB. My god that annoys me.

I'm loving it too Hof.  My personal nitpick issue is the lack of a mini-map.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 08, 2016, 06:03:24 AM
Yeah, must say I'm loving HOI4 too.  Sorry to hear that so many are disappointed though.

I could never go back to HOI3. That's not too hard, as I had given up HOI3 a few years ago at this point. Enjoyed BlackICE for a while. But while I loved HOI3, I was always constantly aware of things that it did badly, or the things that it seemed the game was 'trying' to do but hadn't figured out how to do it correctly. It was a great, deeply flawed game, in my view.

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I honestly feel each version of HOI has been a big step forward from the one before it. There's no question that HOI4 has lots of room to grow. The AI clearly needs more work. But I really don't find it shallow in the least (and I was among the crowd that *really* was unhappy to see the OOB go -- I still miss it, but not nearly enough to go back to HOI3).

Anyway, just to offer another perspective. I am a little surprised at just how much a lot of people dislike HOI4 -- I had kind of expected more of the situation that played out when EUIV released -- some disappointment among the hard-core about some of the changes, but overall, a large embrace of EUIV as the better game. Clearly that has not happened with HOI4. But we're still in very early days with this game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 08, 2016, 06:30:14 AM
I actually have no feeling on this other than I've liked what I've seen thus far. I've played it way too little to go any further than my gut feeling though.

I hope to stick with this one - but I don't have a great track record with the HoI games. Time will tell
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 08, 2016, 07:16:53 AM
I seem to recall a massive hue and cry when HOI3 was released because Stalingrad was located in the wrong place.  Every game has its growing pains.  And flaws we tolerate. 

I'm happy to see the direction they've taken with HOI4.  Much like with Operation Barbarossa, I understand why some folks miss more elaborate logistics and OOBs, but there's much in the new system to like.  We already have plenty of games that try to recreate WW2 down to the last bullet.  This is a more abstract approach, that with refinement hopefully will allow a more strategic focus. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 08, 2016, 07:33:23 AM
Seems to me the people who don't like it are the people who actually liked hoI 3 and we're expecting something complex like its predecessor (when it was clearly stated it wasn't going to be....and that's on the buyer)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 08, 2016, 07:53:26 AM
I think I'm a bit OP. I'm playing as fascist greece, defeated and annexed Bulgaria, transported half my divisons to africa and encircled the british, took cairo and Tel aviv. Now I'm sitting on the edge of Czeckslovakia and waiting for the russians to throw themselves against my forts.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 08, 2016, 09:06:25 AM
Seems to me the people who don't like it are the people who actually liked hoI 3 and we're expecting something complex like its predecessor (when it was clearly stated it wasn't going to be....and that's on the buyer)

I simply don't buy the argument that HOI4 is less complex than its predecessor. The challenges may have shifted to new places, but the idea that HOI4 is somehow unchallenging and shallow is hogwash. Definitely has some rough edges, not trying to suggest otherwise. But as someone who does feel that Stellaris in its current state is a little shallow (though it will grow), I don't have that feeling at all with HOI4. And I put more hours into HOI3 and BlackICE than I can account for --
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 08, 2016, 09:07:05 AM
I seem to recall a massive hue and cry when HOI3 was released because Stalingrad was located in the wrong place.

I'd forgotten about that and numerous other glaring faults. Still, it didn't stop me from enjoying the game from day one. No doubt IV will improve over the coming months and years too.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 08, 2016, 09:12:36 AM
I simply don't buy the argument that HOI4 is less complex than its predecessor. The challenges may have shifted to new places, but the idea that HOI4 is somehow unchallenging and shallow is hogwash.

The same was said of Stellaris, and it was "hogwash" there too (you're much more polite than me, I'd have said "bollocks" ;)).

Myself, I'm not dissuaded by the negative comments I've seen thus far.  Stellaris is literally the only reason I haven't yet bought HoI4.  I suspect I'll crack within a week or two!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 10:28:59 AM
Here's what the AI in HOI4 is doing.

Playing first game as UK. I lost Gibraltar when Nationalist Spain entered on the Axis side and I wasn't expecting it. The straits of Gibraltar are closed so all naval transports to Africa must take the long route around the cape of good hope and up the red sea. If I'm daring, I can sneak subs past the straits but I haven't.

USA entered the war December '41. It's now Feb '42. I've secured all of North Africa and tied down the Axis around the East Horn. I have pretty much control of the Med.

I've enabled the 'see allies war plans' mode and the war plans you see are the AI's. AI USA has planned an invasion of Spain from the south and the north, complete with first-stage offensive lines. So, that's a two-front envelopment. As you can see, it plans to take all ports in the north and the south, with a preliminary invasion of Gibraltar. They also are planning to hop the islands in the med.

Interesting?


(http://orig00.deviantart.net/aef4/f/2016/160/2/1/20160608171559_1_by_jack_o_tales-da5kyxa.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 08, 2016, 11:04:07 AM
Ian C

Your posts/screen shots are NOT helping my decision on postponing my purchase of this game!  :coolsmiley:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 08, 2016, 11:19:28 AM
Dammit my resolve is weakening. I actually like all the theoretical stuff more than you standard "we'll set up WWII how it was historically and then you can beat your head against the wall with the mistakes made"

Biggest thing I want to try is not going after the USSR and using those resources to attempt Sea Lion.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 08, 2016, 11:52:57 AM

Interesting?


Very.  I'm sure the AI will be hit-or-miss, especially at first.  But I love the idea of being able to plan an operation in detail and then let my generals do their thing, mistakes and all.  My hope is that the mechanic will become more robust with time -- adding things like more nuanced tactical goals (flanking, envelopment, etc.) and greater and more varied influence of individual generals (Montgomery better on defensive plans, Patton on offensive, etc.)

Yes, the system needs work.  But I also think it has plenty of head room. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 12:12:05 PM
Yep, seeing allied AI plans is great. In the above example I'm now able to support what they are doing and have moved a lot of air power to the North African coast. I've also got my first para unit ready and have several specialist divisions ready. As soon as they land, I'm in there. This is a much better way than HOI 3, where you had to mark areas of interest and hope the AI would invade.

The biggest issue I have is time. I have the day off and played through a game month in an hour which means in total I got in 3 hours of play today, taking it from December 41 to Feb 42. The speed we saw them playing the game on the streams is total nonsense. It's like trying to force a steak dinner down your throat in twenty seconds. To enjoy the game fully, don't expect fast play. The sheer amount of detail, choices and decisions you have will take up a lot of time if you are really playing it properly and soaking it in. There an awful lot to take in.

On it's own merits this is a really deep, fun solid game. Without a manual.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 08, 2016, 12:18:02 PM
Yep, seeing allied AI plans is great. In the above example I'm now able to support what they are doing and have moved a lot of air power to the North African coast. I've also got my first para unit ready and have several specialist divisions ready. As soon as they land, I'm in there. This is a much better way than HOI 3, where you had to mark areas of interest and hope the AI would invade.

The biggest issue I have is time. I have the day off and played through a game month in an hour which means in total I got in 3 hours of play today, taking it from December 41 to Feb 42. The speed we saw them playing the game on the streams is total nonsense. It's like trying to force a steak dinner down your throat in twenty seconds. To enjoy the game fully, don't expect fast play. The sheer amount of detail, choices and decisions you have will take up a lot of time if you are really playing it properly and soaking it in. There an awful lot to take in.

On it's own merits this is a really deep, fun solid game. Without a manual.

IanC....just curious, in your posted screenshot, are you playing with "Historical AI Focuses" on or off?  One thing I can't figure out; how do I get a group of bombers based in California to the Phillipines? It's too far to fly....how do I set up a transport of planes?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 12:36:43 PM

IanC....just curious, in your posted screenshot, are you playing with "Historical AI Focuses" on or off? 

On, but be aware, the National Focuses you choose (Foci, for the pedants here) will affect the AI's choices and also trigger AI events, so, in theory, if you play 'perfectly historically' and choose each National Focus in the right order, it should follow the events we are familiar with. However...there are also other triggers that can override history, but what I've seen so far has been plausible.

Quote
One thing I can't figure out; how do I get a group of bombers based in California to the Phillipines? It's too far to fly....how do I set up a transport of planes?

You click on the Bomber wing and then click on the airfield you want them to go to. They transfer automatically gradually over time.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 08, 2016, 12:50:13 PM
I simply don't buy the argument that HOI4 is less complex than its predecessor. The challenges may have shifted to new places, but the idea that HOI4 is somehow unchallenging and shallow is hogwash.

The same was said of Stellaris, and it was "hogwash" there too (you're much more polite than me, I'd have said "bollocks" ;)).

Myself, I'm not dissuaded by the negative comments I've seen thus far.  Stellaris is literally the only reason I haven't yet bought HoI4.  I suspect I'll crack within a week or two!

I most certainly wouldn't dissuade anyone from buying HoI4.  On the contrary.  I think a lot of people will like the game, including people who liked HoI3.  I just don't happen to be one of those people.

I absolutely don't hate HoI4, and the release version is significantly better and more playable than the release version of any previous HoI game.  My dislike of the game is purely on me and perhaps says that I'm just too impatient or unwilling to accept the great grey Ogre of change.  I mean, there are people out there that don't like the Godfather, but I doubt any of them would argue that it's actually a bad film.

I'm probably going to come back and take another look when a lot of DLC comes out.  Right now though I just have other games that I enjoy more to play.  Considering how far along the WW1 mod seems to be, it's inevitable I'll try again, especially once that's fully fleshed out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 08, 2016, 03:24:21 PM
Well, curses!

Just bought the game (Green Man Gaming 27% off!)

Curse you and your screen shots/reviews Ian C!!  :knuppel2:

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 08, 2016, 03:31:51 PM
Don't blame me if you don't like it!

BTW - if I understand this correctly - the 'Cooperative' game option - does this mean several players can control the same nation against the AI over the net?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ghostryder on June 08, 2016, 04:09:41 PM
I seem to recall a massive hue and cry when HOI3 was released because Stalingrad was located in the wrong place.

It was a bit more than that. In fact a ton more than that. New York, ohio whatnot...everywhere you looked the map was wrong. But what made that so glaring was all the hype about the new map prior to release. Aside from that the game simply was broken in all areas. It rained more than Noah's days....continuing for hundreds of days. The game ran sluggish at best. The A.I....what little there was you could call such a thing, was bonkers, etc etc. The game was simply FUBAR from top to bottom---it was so bad in fact I recall a public apology on it's state when released and a period of refunds. it took years to bring to what ended up being a pretty decent game---but not near HOI2 with the expansions--which in my view remains King of the series.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 08, 2016, 05:08:54 PM
I've got another question. Do any of you have any idea what the blue diamond, by some of the ships on the naval research screen, is indicative of?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 08, 2016, 05:23:40 PM
I've got another question. Do any of you have any idea what the blue diamond, by some of the ships on the naval research screen, is indicative of?

Thought I read somewhere they represent capital ships...meaning ships that require escorts
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 08, 2016, 05:59:38 PM
Just bought the game.....information OVERLOAD  :uglystupid2:

Man, is the music in the game amazing or what? Game look so nice. I have a feeling me NOT being a vet of any HoI games I'm going to enjoy this game. Lots too learn, but I'm going to take it one mouse over and one mouse click at a time.

Fun times  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 08, 2016, 06:17:33 PM
AH geeze acctingman... now I'm starting to waffle about getting the game sooner rather than later... only thing holding be back now is that it's summer and I have Stellaris to play.... 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 08, 2016, 06:38:02 PM
Thought I read somewhere they represent capital ships...meaning ships that require escorts

Excellent! That makes perfect sense since all ships larger than light cruisers have the diamond. Thank you.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 08, 2016, 08:52:52 PM
First two hours in and my head hurts!  :tickedoff:

But 4 Guinness beers later, it hurts less  :crazy2:

I've got lots to learn. Think I'm going to spend some time on some good tutorial videos. Conceptually, I get the game, but it's hard to manage it all.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 08, 2016, 09:17:23 PM
This is reminding me of the Stellaris thread.  First couple of days a lot of head scratching and being a little peeved.  By day 3-4 more understanding.  After that, a lot of ohhh, this is kewl.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: AchillesLastStand on June 09, 2016, 02:23:44 AM
Just a quick heads up for anyone interested. I have 2 mods that I found it on the workshop which have made the game at least more appealing to the eyes.
The coloured buttons mod which adds different colours to the UI

The other one, http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699686998&searchtext=terrain Better terrain view, really distinguishes the difference between mountains/forests etc all of the diff types of terrain.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 09, 2016, 02:27:44 AM
Reminds me of Nobunaga's Ambition too. The newest version is super streamlined. Old fans may miss the "numbers overload" and micro management but for me it the best iteration.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 09, 2016, 04:24:47 AM
I thought this was a good post from a paradox person over at their forums....to me summarizes how they tried to set expectations all along so there should have been very little surprises once released.

***from paradox person***

Anyway: There's criticism of the game as HoI4, and there's being mad we didn't make HoI3.5. We said from the start we didn't like what we thought was excessive complexity and busywork in HoI3 and were going to largely reinvent things for a more streamlined experience. Some people were mad about this because they really wanted HoI3.5, but it wasn't a game we wanted to make. Every time we showed off a new feature there was always some faction lamenting the non-3.5ness and every time we explained that wasn't what we were making. Now the game is out and despite everything some people are still mad it's not HoI3.5, and it never will be - complaining about it won't change this.
 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 09, 2016, 04:36:50 AM
Just a quick heads up for anyone interested. I have 2 mods that I found it on the workshop which have made the game at least more appealing to the eyes.
The coloured buttons mod which adds different colours to the UI

The other one, http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699686998&searchtext=terrain Better terrain view, really distinguishes the difference between mountains/forests etc all of the diff types of terrain.

Nice.

There's also these:


No Experience for Division Design
This seems neat at first but be warned it bypasses how battle experience works for modifying division structure. In the game, Land Battle Experience simulates doctrine change gained from experience and will gain you points that can be spent when modifying divisional structure and creating new designs.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698620155&searchtext=



Better Counters (Yes!)
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699668071&searchtext=


(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/269468379388994621/DE675BC00DEEDA8A11E8EA5044201AAA77FF05EB/)

(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/269468379388993745/60D72661FEF703017B85C6DC04A9A1151BF502E3/)




More NATO Counters


http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698665197&searchtext=


(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/262712703881196068/49D181C08C25644CF38592A705A524813FED6685/)



More Division Icons
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699735138&searchtext=

(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/261587080039214031/4D4F2CFC82DB2B7670721C968C0863E010FB30FA/)


3D Mods

Tank Size
Larger Tank 3D Models
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699926805&searchtext=


Micro Models
Small air units on map.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699857751&searchtext=

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 09, 2016, 06:28:13 AM
IanC....thanks for the heads up on the counter mod, I've been hoping one like this would come along.  I can't stand the sprites at all and turned them off in the options screen.  I like the look of the new counters much more.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 09, 2016, 06:38:19 AM
Just a quick heads up for anyone interested. I have 2 mods that I found it on the workshop which have made the game at least more appealing to the eyes.
The coloured buttons mod which adds different colours to the UI

The other one, http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699686998&searchtext=terrain Better terrain view, really distinguishes the difference between mountains/forests etc all of the diff types of terrain.

Thanks....both of these are excellent, especially the better terrain view, it really improves the view.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 08:06:17 AM
Paradox HoI4 forums are soooooo   :uglystupid2:

In my 20+ years of gaming and reading various forums, I don't think I've ever seen so many cray babies, whiners, complainers, self-entitled spoiled brats collected in one area. WOW

I get making a comment and even suggesting changes, but my GOD......are "we" this pathetic? It makes me not want to log onto the internet anymore   :-\
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mirth on June 09, 2016, 08:10:27 AM
In my 20+ years of gaming and reading various forums, I don't think I've ever seen so many cray babies, whiners, complainers, self-entitled spoiled brats collected in one area.

You haven't spent enough time here :P
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 08:28:55 AM
Honestly, this is the most friendly and helpful gaming forum I've ever visited. Wish I found it sooner.

Some of you are hilarious. Most, if not all of you, are very knowledgeable, beyond civil and very informative.  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 09, 2016, 09:15:35 AM
I'm none of those things, but I have a fantastic arse!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mirth on June 09, 2016, 09:26:58 AM
I'm none of those things, but I have a fantastic arse!

I am a fantastic arse.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 09:32:58 AM
I'm none of those things, but I have a fantastic arse!

I am a fantastic arse.

Isn't this common knowledge around here?  :coolsmiley:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 09, 2016, 09:33:36 AM
The Paradox forums are a free-for-all amongst pedantic 13-year olds, with the occasional voices of reason being lynch-mobbed and flamed into oblivion. Any resistance descends into a flame war and a thread-lock.

After 23 hours total game play from a September 1939 start, I'm at June 1942 and I have no doubt that this game, while at war on multiple fronts, should never be played above speed 2 and with liberal pausing.
There's just so much going on when war breaks out I don't know how anyone could play at speed 4 or higher and take everything in. It's a huge game.




Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 09:46:05 AM
I agree Ian C

I can't play this game beyond the second speed level, but I'm sure it's mainly due to me not knowing what in blazes I'm doing, but I'm ok with that. I'm LOVING hovering over any and all icons and I'm enjoying the learning curve.

I have a list of nations I want to play as and I'm starting from least favorite to most favorite (not sure if it's the US or Germany)

Anyways, thanks to everyone here for their comments/tips/tricks. Doubt I'm going back to the Paradox forums for any assistance.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on June 09, 2016, 09:50:08 AM
... and I have no doubt that this game, while at war on multiple fronts, should never be played above speed 2 and with liberal pausing...

True, unless you play as Brazil.  :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Nefaro on June 09, 2016, 10:03:32 AM

There's just so much going on when war breaks out I don't know how anyone could play at speed 4 or higher and take everything in. It's a huge game.


I see others running CK2 and EU4 LPs at maximum speed, or nearly so, and can't fathom it.  Like they're trying to rush through the game as fast as possible, at the risk of missing trends and accidentally clicking the wrong thing on the bursts of event pop-ups because they aren't reading much of them. 

I'm sure they do it because of their experience, and remembering what most of the events look like, but I still see them admit to screwing something up immediately after having done so.  Because they're clicking through everything so fast while it runs at warp 5. 

Dunno how they do it.  I'm OCD enough that I'm constantly delving into the information and making sure I know exactly what's going on.  Too much micro-management fixation?  Whatever it is, I'd be hurling insults at myself if I was blasting through everything so fast that I missed something, and not taking the time to learn all the little mechanical intricacies & info is sacrilege. 

But there are quite a few players who want to run it at full speed ahead & damn the torpedoes.  :D  The noobs with this tendency are probably a notable portion of those complaining on the Pdox forums when they haven't taken the time to figure out how everything works (or are just RTS click-festers).


Anyway.. it's good to hear that HOI4 is in much better shape than previous ones, on release.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 10:08:42 AM
Nefaro....just wanted to say I think your avatar is classic  :2funny:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Nefaro on June 09, 2016, 11:12:45 AM
Nefaro....just wanted to say I think your avatar is classic  :2funny:

 >:D

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 09, 2016, 12:08:48 PM

I see others running CK2 and EU4 LPs at maximum speed, or nearly so, and can't fathom it.  Like they're trying to rush through the game as fast as possible, at the risk of missing trends and accidentally clicking the wrong thing on the bursts of event pop-ups because they aren't reading much of them. 


There's always some guy who claims to be an authority on all the flaws in the game based on the five full campaigns he played on the first day of release.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 09, 2016, 12:36:29 PM
My totally straight-forward plan for the invasion of Poland:

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 09, 2016, 12:48:25 PM
I just went blind  :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bobarossa on June 09, 2016, 03:35:35 PM
I just went blind  :D

Didn't your parents warn you about that!

Seriously, that picture is almost enough to make me give up my online-DRM aversion.  I AM worried about the simplifications (ok, streamlining) of HOI4.  I recently reinstalled HOI2 and forgot how much I disliked the tech simplifications where you just researched division levels instead of being able to focus on speed/armor/guns, etc. 

I am happy to see the counter and map mods.  When HOI3 came out with that base map, everyone screamed about how you couldn't tell the terrain type without looking at the pop-ups.  They quickly added a simplified terrain map but then didn't enable it to be used with weather overlay.  Hopefully, these mods fix those possible issues.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 09, 2016, 03:59:03 PM
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I like the 3D models. The colours of the map, the day/night cycle, the weather, rain, snow, sound FX. I think it's a nice as the CIV map.
I just watched snow fall in winter as troops were training near a German forest area in Bavaria. That's when I caved in.

A couple of tips: some decorative icons on screens panels might not be decorative. Click 'everything' that looks like a design just in case. I've just discovered how to alter conscription and other things by clicking on 'icons' on the Politics screen. Without a manual the learning curve is steep but rewarding. Interesting to see a Conscription law called 'Scraping The Barrel'. I guess I'll save that one for when I'm playing as Germany in '45 and need old men and children.

Battle plans have sunk in with me and I have to say, they are wonderful. As The Reich, I set up an Invasion of Austria just in case Anschluss failed (one of the focuses). It took me an hour of planning and selecting the divisions and also designing a couple of new ones. Anschluss went without incident, and I got all of Austria, with extra factory's and units. Having to plan it all didn't matter as I got my fun out of this as much as making OOB's in HOI3.
In HOI3, planning wasn't this big a deal. Here, it is. You can direct divisions on-the-fly and don't even need to make a battle plan, but the benefits on making one is compelling. The bonuses you get are good. Mousing over the arrow on your General icon will give you a risk assessment of the plans chance of success and tell you why it's not good or bad (divisions not in place, Rain, Superior Enemy Force etc).

I'm finding it more immersive than any other game of this genre I've played. Naval combat is a hoot for detail. Single submarines and destroyers, not a counter of a squadron, but all individually named Single subs. In a UK game a Battleship got sunk by ONE Nazi sub on patrol, and it was named in the battle report (you need to click on the left icon to see more details).

Seriously, I think this is a freaking amazing game once you forget HOI3 and get past the learning curve.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on June 09, 2016, 04:24:48 PM
I love this game.  Paradox did a wonderful job streamlining the interface whilst maintaining the depth they're famous for.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 09, 2016, 04:49:44 PM
Looks like beta patch available....

Stability & Performance
 - Fixed several rare CTDs.
 - Late-game performance optimizations.
 - Large peace conference resolutions are now faster and also properly indicate that they are active to non-participants.
 - Added GUI scaling option for people with very small or very high resolutin displays (experimental).
 - Added a max framerate limiting system (defaults to 75fps) to help people with the combination of bad cooling, great graphics cards and very high screen refresh. If you are one of these with heat issues I would love to hear if this solved it (changing max_fram_rate in settings can let you remove its effect by making it higher, or go lower if you still have issues)

Gameplay
 - Fixed an issue with deploying troops during spanish civil war when continuing savegames.
 - Can now zoom in and out using PgUp and PgDown buttons on keyboard.
 - Stopped an exploit where player could redirect a naval transfer into an invasion without preparation.
 - Fixed a case where fleets who found themselves outside base range would be instantly deleted.
 - Fixed some highlighting issues in tutorial.

Content
 - Added 8 new unique nation leader portraits.
 - Improved some VP/state names in China.
 - Improved a lot of alternate ideology nation names and party/leader names.
 - France can now send volunteers to Spain if they choose the Support Nationalists focus.
 - Fixed many localization issues, both in english and other languages.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 09, 2016, 04:55:58 PM
Glad to hear some are enjoying it as much as I am. I think it's fantastic. By no means a polished gem yet - still a fair number of things that need improving, some serious. But as a foundation and overall concept, this is the HOI I've always wanted.

The Battle Planner takes some getting used to. And getting the AI to do what you want takes some patience and finessing - hence the jumble of arrows in my screenshot. Overall I LOVE this feature though.

Air war needs work. I like the new way air units are handled - a lot less micromanagement than HOI3. But the combat outcomes are fairly absurd. I basically lost my entire fighter arm in the span of 2 weeks once war broke out - over 300 fighters. Casualty figures are way out of whack.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 09, 2016, 05:58:22 PM
Man! You basturds are the worst AA group ever... how am I supposed to hold off buying this when you all are gushings like little girls!  :tickedoff:


CRAP!....
 >:(

When the hell I'm I going to play this!  :buck2:


EDIT--- HA! Saved by expire GMG coupon.... for a while anyway.... :P

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 09, 2016, 06:10:32 PM
Only $28 here

http://www.kinguin.net/hearts-of-iron-steam
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 09, 2016, 06:17:19 PM
Only $28 here

http://www.kinguin.net/hearts-of-iron-steam

 >:(

Yer not helping at all.....  :knuppel2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 09, 2016, 06:18:06 PM
You know you want to:)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: tgb on June 09, 2016, 08:09:33 PM
I caved.  The streamlining and lack of fiddly micromanagement sealed the deal for me.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 09, 2016, 08:18:13 PM
I'm right behind you.  I hated HOI2/3 because of the micro-management issues.  I might give this a shot.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 09, 2016, 08:23:43 PM
I'm right behind you.  I hated HOI2/3 because of the micro-management issues.  I might give this a shot.
Me too.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: -budd- on June 09, 2016, 09:37:51 PM
Well shit, isn't anybody gonna hold out. I need a role model here. The stream lining is what's drawing me in, the other games just had to much micromanagement. Not to mention I can't think of one grand strategy game I've stuck with, yea that's it grand strategy isn't my thing, not gonna fold.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 09, 2016, 10:27:53 PM
Well shit, isn't anybody gonna hold out....

I haven't caved yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on June 09, 2016, 10:53:24 PM
I'm holding off.  Just say no.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Richie61 on June 09, 2016, 11:04:51 PM
Well shit, isn't anybody gonna hold out. I need a role model here. The stream lining is what's drawing me in, the other games just had to much micromanagement. Not to mention I can't think of one grand strategy game I've stuck with, yea that's it grand strategy isn't my thing, not gonna fold.

I agree with all you said Budd! Plus I am flat broke for the next 2 weeks!  ;D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 09, 2016, 11:27:16 PM
Well shit, isn't anybody gonna hold out.

I won't be buying it.

...until pay day. :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 10, 2016, 03:25:21 AM


Just some thoughts on the game. Debating doing a lets play, but everybody and their mother is doing videos. Opening it up to the public if they want to see me doing a campaign xD
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 10, 2016, 03:50:01 AM
Although they released the small beta patch, they also said they would be discussing their initial plans for future patching in today's development diary.  Will be interesting to see what they feel needs updating and if any fan feedback gets considered.

Hoping to get more time with this over weekend, but looks like work might get in the way.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on June 10, 2016, 04:35:36 AM
The way production and recruiting is handled in this game is elegant. 

Conducting field drills in order for your boots on the ground to gain experience prior to the war breaking out is strangely appealing. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: chemkid on June 10, 2016, 06:05:04 AM
Well shit, isn't anybody gonna hold out.

I won't be buying it.

...until pay day. :D
same here, +1! (...those damn nato-counter mod pictures got me!!!)  ::)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 10, 2016, 06:05:30 AM
Hof....well done initial review video. I agree with your points about the difference between streamlining and dumbing down.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 06:06:29 AM
There's a lot of haterade on the Matrix site about HoI4 too (and Paradox in general).

I'm torn. From the videos I've seen and the designer diary's posted it seems like Pdox is consciously moving away from HoI being a true "WWII simulator / strategy game" and I'm strangely OK with that. Combat has never been their strong point at least recently (I didn't start getting into Pdox games until EU3 or so) and there's a metric ton of games out that A) are WWII based and B) simulate the combat of all fronts better.

Lately it seems Pdox's strength is the ability to allow games to explore historical plausibility, with various success. I agree conquering the world with RyuKyu in EU4 is beyond a stretch.

But restoring the Roman Empire? Uniting Scotland and marching on England during their darkest times? Spain staying a world power?

I think 2 things here...1) they realize that if they release a true WWII strategic simulation it will get lost in the the sea of others and 2) I wish they would drop the HoI moniker and call it something else to better show that it's more free form.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: chemkid on June 10, 2016, 06:10:04 AM
...SNIP!>>>
I wish they would drop the HoI moniker and call it something else to better show that it's more free form.
they did! here in germany, it's called 'Heart of Iron IV' and comes w/o hitler's face... just gorgeous!   :smitten:  ...runs and hides inside AE Editor.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Zulu1966 on June 10, 2016, 06:21:10 AM
I won't be buying.
I would love something of detail that simulates world war II
Not something like world war II or something where Japan invades Sweden at some point. There just isn't a game that simulates the whole thing in detail in a totally non abstract way.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 10, 2016, 07:01:42 AM
Good in depth guide  (This is not a "quick start" guide, it's more like a manual)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 07:51:58 AM
Another tip. Those little info icons on research projects aren't icons. Click them and you get another project which unlocks a new battalion type for your divisions or carrier-based aircraft on the Air Research tab.

Example: Stug III

(http://orig13.deviantart.net/0326/f/2016/162/b/7/dtryudtrffyt_by_jack_o_tales-da5th4z.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 10, 2016, 07:58:57 AM
IanC....holy crap, I missed that one entirely. Thanks for pointing it out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 08:00:14 AM
The way production and recruiting is handled in this game is elegant. 

Conducting field drills in order for your boots on the ground to gain experience prior to the war breaking out is strangely appealing.

It is. There's something so immersive about the whole game.

Another tip: you can click the 'deploy now' button to instantly deploy under-trained divisions. They can be deployed immediately as raw green recruits, once they reach 20%. I'm saying this because there's a requirement on some National Focuses for you to field a certain amount of troops before triggering the historical event, for example, Anschluss of Austria requires the Reich to field over 550,000 men first. I nearly botched this but hit the deploy button and viola, I got all of Austria as my in-training divisions were instantly deployed. You can of course continue training them by clicking the 'Exercise' button. I also like how the Rhinelands are locked off to the German Reich prior to the reoccupation event.

IanC....holy crap, I missed that one entirely. Thanks for pointing it out.

You're welcome  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 10, 2016, 08:21:09 AM
We need a separate "Stuff Ian C Figured Out That The Rest Of Us Were Too Stupid To Notice" thread.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 10, 2016, 08:31:36 AM


Just some thoughts on the game. Debating doing a lets play, but everybody and their mother is doing videos. Opening it up to the public if they want to see me doing a campaign xD

Really appreciate the video Hofstadter!

The more of these let's play videos I see the better it helps me "see" things I'm missing. I'm a visual learner  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 08:37:18 AM
Talking of combat and immersion, here's a great reason not to zip past each combat at speed:


(http://orig10.deviantart.net/3ac5/f/2016/162/f/a/fgddzf_by_jack_o_tales-da5tl8j.jpg)




Click the Tactics Button:

(http://orig00.deviantart.net/ab27/f/2016/162/e/5/untitled_by_jack_o_tales-da5tl7u.jpg)



And...



(http://orig10.deviantart.net/5f17/f/2016/162/e/3/long_by_jack_o_tales-da5tl7h.jpg)




Mouse over each for more info:


(http://orig07.deviantart.net/f2d9/f/2016/162/c/d/untitled_by_jack_o_tales-da5tl8a.jpg)


(http://orig02.deviantart.net/450d/f/2016/162/3/0/untitled_by_jack_o_tales-da5tl80.jpg)


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 10, 2016, 08:59:29 AM
GOOD LORD.....my eyes are bleeding!!   :buck2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 09:00:17 AM
You can choose individual equipment, artillery, weapons, vehicles etc for each Division template, and also use captured vehicles, artillery and weapons and equipment to outfit custom divisions. 

NOTE: if you want to create a new Division template, click on 'Duplicate' first. If you don't, you will change the template you edit and will update ALL divisions of that type in the field.  On the plus side, this is a great way to upgrade all divisions at once, if that's what is intended.



Austrian & Czech gear gained after Anschluss and The Czech Crisis:

(http://orig05.deviantart.net/d84c/f/2016/162/3/3/1_by_jack_o_tales-da5tned.jpg)

(http://img09.deviantart.net/4bf9/i/2016/162/2/9/2_by_jack_o_tales-da5tne1.jpg)

(http://orig01.deviantart.net/932d/f/2016/162/0/7/3_by_jack_o_tales-da5tndo.jpg)

(http://orig11.deviantart.net/fa37/f/2016/162/6/8/4_by_jack_o_tales-da5tndh.jpg)

(http://orig14.deviantart.net/d2df/f/2016/162/d/8/5_by_jack_o_tales-da5tnd9.jpg)

(http://orig01.deviantart.net/956e/f/2016/162/5/a/6_by_jack_o_tales-da5tncy.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 09:01:10 AM
Yeah I noticed that too in I think Quill's lets play...and immediately thought of a couple of things:

Pdox really is not doing there game a service by not having a manual...or even a quick start guide to go along with it. That is a HUGE amount of depth there that I think people will just gloss over.

I think this bodes well for increasing the depth of combat in Stellaris. My first thought there was to build something where you can create mixed fleet combat stances. This proves that it's there, it just needs to be implemented some way for Stellaris.

The more I see from HoI4 the more I think Pdox held back on Stellaris because they did not want to scare the casual gamer away. I think there is either a lot under the surface waiting for release or (and I'd be annoyed at this) that they planned upfront to add depth via paid DLC.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Barthheart on June 10, 2016, 09:08:42 AM
Welp..... thanks Ian C.... Now I will be buying this... it'll just have to wait until after Origins.  :idiot2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 10, 2016, 09:33:32 AM
I'm worried about the bleeding effects too...(aka...DLC's)

I'll be kinda irked if they release a ton of them AND they're all good.  :knuppel2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 09:35:44 AM
Man, I LOVE the new production system. And I love how it lets you tailor the TOE of your divisions by deciding which specific builds of vehicles and equipment the division will have.

Anyone else playing with the "No Army Experience for Division Design" mod? I'm really glad someone came up with this, because designing division templates is loads of fun, and the idea that you should be severely limited in doing so (due to 'experience' points accrued) strikes me as an artificial game constraint.

One thing I've learned:  keep your key production lines going *throughout the war*. In my first game I made the mistake of stopping production of things like trucks, soldiers' weapons etc. once I had filled the needs of the division I was building, with a slight 'buffer' of extra equipment kept in storage for attrition.

But really, there's no reason ever to completely shut down your basic lines. Just keep one factory devoted to "infantry weapons" even when you have a huge surplus. That way you maintain your production efficiency. And odds are, you will never have enough of the basic stuff once the war gets going in earnest.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 09:41:00 AM
I'm worried about the bleeding effects too...(aka...DLC's)

I'll be kinda irked if they release a ton of them AND they're all good.  :knuppel2:

Well, if they weren't good that makes the choice that much easier ;)

My DLC comment was more directed toward the Stellaris launch. I think (although obviously not certain) that besides espionage HOI is much more fleshed out than Stellaris. Of course that can easily be explained through new IP vs established game vision. (IE they KNEW what they wanted to do with HOI4)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CJReich46 on June 10, 2016, 09:53:00 AM
I'm curious too, so I haven't caved (at least until payday  ::) )

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 10, 2016, 09:54:38 AM
You can choose individual equipment, artillery, weapons, vehicles etc for each Division template, and also use captured vehicles, artillery and weapons and equipment to outfit custom divisions. 

NOTE: if you want to create a new Division template, click on 'Duplicate' first. If you don't, you will change the template you edit and will update ALL divisions of that type in the field.  On the plus side, this is a great way to upgrade all divisions at once, if that's what is intended.


IanC....you did it to me again. I screwed up not using the 'duplicate' button first and ended up upgrading all my divisions.  Keep the tips coming....!!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 10, 2016, 09:57:50 AM
You guys are making it very hard not to make a purchase now.

Seeing some of the comments on things like the depth of research and TOE choices, I would think that folks like ICE will be able to expand on those parts very easily. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 10, 2016, 09:58:45 AM
I'd be interested to see a list of "must have" mods. So far, I've only used mods that adjust graphic settings/features.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 10, 2016, 10:15:28 AM

Pdox really is not doing there game a service by not having a manual...or even a quick start guide to go along with it. That is a HUGE amount of depth there that I think people will just gloss over.


I think many of the complaints over on the Paradox board (and most of my own concerns) actually are due to folks not understanding how the game actually works.  There's much more there than meets the eye, and it would help if Paradox did a better job of exposing these hidden details.   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 10:26:41 AM
I think the HOI4 modding scene is pretty thin at the moment, understandably. I have a couple of graphical mods installed -- NATO counters, colored buttons, historical flags, larger counters -- but the only one that in some sense affects game mechanics is the "No Army Experience for Division Design" mod.

There's some argument about whether this mod constitutes a 'cheat.' Arguably using it gives the human player an advantage over the AI (although the modder states that the same 'no experience requirement' also applies to the AI) -- but then, the human player has massive advantages over the AI to begin with. Mostly I just want to use it to be able to inject some historical realism, and because designing divisions is fun! HOI4's basic starting infantry division consists of 3 regiments of 3 infantry battalions, plus artillery and engineer companies. For majors like Germany, USA, that's simply way off. What I've been using as my "Infantry division ('39)" template is more along the lines of:

3 regiments consisting of 3 infantry battalions plus 1 artillery battalion
1 regiment of 1 artillery battalion and 1 anti-tank battalion
5 support companies:  Engineer, Reconnaissance, Artillery, Anti-tank, Anti-Air.

This gives a total manpower of around 15,000, which is much closer to the reality.

The awesome thing about the Designer too is, you can create different TOEs as the war goes on -- "Infantry Division ('39)" can look a lot differernt from "Infantry Division ('43)" if you want it to -- just as it did in real life.




Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 10, 2016, 10:32:20 AM
"I think many of the complaints over on the XXXXX board (and most of my own concerns) actually are due to folks not understanding how the game actually works." 

This should be the title of a stickied thread at the top of every game out there.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: republic on June 10, 2016, 10:47:40 AM
This is the first Hearts of Iron I've ever understood.  I'm currently playing as Japan and having a great time.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 10, 2016, 10:56:39 AM
Quick question....If I'm buying on steam and only play single player; Do I need the DLCs like Cadet, Colonel, etc.?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 11:28:48 AM
Quick question....If I'm buying on steam and only play single player; Do I need the DLCs like Cadet, Colonel, etc.?

Cadet is the 'basic' game. You get the Polish DLC free with it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Fetrik on June 10, 2016, 11:30:29 AM
Quick question....If I'm buying on steam and only play single player; Do I need the DLCs like Cadet, Colonel, etc.?

Cadet is the base game. Colonel contains extra cosmetics, cruiser models and that sort of thing so that is only for your own enjoyment.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 11:34:00 AM
And I caved after seeing Ian's last update. Damn you paradox!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 10, 2016, 11:36:28 AM
Quick question....If I'm buying on steam and only play single player; Do I need the DLCs like Cadet, Colonel, etc.?

Cadet is the base game. Colonel contains extra cosmetics, cruiser models and that sort of thing so that is only for your own enjoyment.

Thanks
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 10, 2016, 12:02:03 PM
the only one that in some sense affects game mechanics is the "No Army Experience for Division Design" mod.

There's some argument about whether this mod constitutes a 'cheat.'

Training your troops also generates Experience, and some cabinet members (Theorist - Mobile warfare expert) give you a certain XP per day.
So far I don't feel the need for this 'cheat'.  I think as Germany I generated about 40 XP in 1936 without entering any war (besides sending volunteers to Nationalist Spain).

These are the mods I have for the moment (just immersion) :

Flavor Names extended
Historical Coloured Loadingscreens
No fog of war (only clears the map to check the terrain - doesn't show any unit info)
Immersive Theatre Shields
[World Press Mod] New York Times (USA Democratic)
German Music Addon
Better terrain view
DzK Better Counters
Coloured Buttons
Adiya's Historical Flag Pack
More NATO counters

I went for the Marshall edition to get the first two expansions (buying on Imperial Games reduced the price for the Euro zone from 89.99 Ä to 60 Ä ; made me feel I made money while spending it)


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 12:33:50 PM
So here's a question...it costs you construction units when you need to import raw materials.

What do you get when you export?

N/M you can see it on the Construction screen
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 12:38:43 PM
The "trade factory capacity for imported raw materials" mechanic is pretty unintuitive and makes no real-world sense that I can discern. I guess it serves its function as a game mechanic but it still kind of rubs me the wrong way all the same.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 10, 2016, 12:48:21 PM
Tips:

Adaptive Manoeuvres
You can take control of separate units or groups during a war plan, even while the AI is directing them. You can then use them to attack on the fly and when they've done what you ordered, they fall back in with the plan automatically.

Support Attack works just like it did on HOI3. Select unit, shift-click on area being attacked by you and it will join in, without advancing after combat. The AI will also do this for you automatically, if favourable.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 01:11:12 PM
The "trade factory capacity for imported raw materials" mechanic is pretty unintuitive and makes no real-world sense that I can discern. I guess it serves its function as a game mechanic but it still kind of rubs me the wrong way all the same.

I look at it this way - If you run out of raw material your factories aren't going to run.

It is being abstracted that you are creating goods you don't necessarily need out of surplus raw material to sell to countries that have raw material you need and they are willing to trade back to you.

It's extremely abstracted...but in my mind it works (ie you can have all the factories in the world but without manpower and raw materials all you have is a bunch of empty buildings)

Another way to put look at it is the IC method in HOI3...you can manually boost your IC count...but if you build it to the point of outpacing raw supply you have IC inefficiencies. Here it is broken down into 6 raw materials, C Factories and M Factories.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 01:27:09 PM
Hmm, still not sure I follow.

As I understand it, here's how production works:

I am building fighters with some of my Military Factories. Rubber is one of the raw materials required. I'm currently running a deficit of rubber, which is hampering my production, so I ask Netherlands to trade me some of their excess rubber *in return for the use of some of my Civilian Factories*.  I'm pretty sure that's literally how the mechanic works, yes?

From a *game* standpoint I (sort of) understand what's happening. You have Military Factories that use raw materials to produce vehicles, equipment. You have Civilian Factories that produce 'consumer goods' (entirely abstracted as a fixed limit -- you have no control over this beyond the economic law you set), and 'state' improvements like Oil Refineries, infrastructure, AAA emplacements, as well as other Military and Civilian Factories  -- **and** you trade Civilian Factory capacity to other nations in return for raw materials you may lack for your Military Factories.

You need to strike a balance between having a certain number of Military Factories, and a certain number of Civilian Factories. If you have too many Military Factories, you won't have the free Civilian Factory capacity available to trade for raw materials you lack. Too many civilian factories, and your production of weapons and vehicles will slow down or grind to a halt.

So I get the balancing act that's going on here. But for the life of me, I can't figure out how such a scenario corresponds to anything like how trade and manufacturing actually works. It just seems entirely artificial. Which I can live with. It just strikes me as kind of weird.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 10, 2016, 01:35:13 PM
The "trade factory capacity for imported raw materials" mechanic is pretty unintuitive and makes no real-world sense that I can discern. I guess it serves its function as a game mechanic but it still kind of rubs me the wrong way all the same.

How I see it is you import something in return for something the people of the other country want.  Therefore you use one or more of your factories to produce those wanted goods.  While they do this you can't use them to build for yourself.   You don't give them a factory but you give them the output of that factory.  The result is the same : one less factory available for you.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 10, 2016, 01:36:49 PM
This is the first Hearts of Iron I've ever understood.  I'm currently playing as Japan and having a great time.
This is absolutely 100% more inviting to me than previous games. Having played the tutorial and carried on a tad, I can say that I have a much better grasp of the game than previous iterations. I can see me firing this up for some time to continue my campaign of world domination as Turkey  ;D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 10, 2016, 01:39:00 PM
The "trade factory capacity for imported raw materials" mechanic is pretty unintuitive and makes no real-world sense that I can discern. I guess it serves its function as a game mechanic but it still kind of rubs me the wrong way all the same.

How I see it is you import something in return for something the people of the other country want.  Therefore you use one or more of your factories to produce those wanted goods.  While they do this you can't use them to build for yourself.   You don't give them a factory but you give them the output of that factory.  The result is the same : one less factory available for you.
That is my understanding - get goods in return for "something" they want - which uses a factory

I'm not sure I like the mechanic of only being able to set quantities of 8 mind...but maybe it's ok - I noticed a country was defaulting on my requirement of 8 rubber - only providing 6. I had to cancel that and look for a country that was going to provide me what I needed to maximise the use (loss) of a factory.

I don't currently get Air - but I'll get there.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 01:41:49 PM
How I see it is you import something in return for something the people of the other country want.  Therefore you use one or more of your factories to produce those wanted goods.  While they do this you can't use them to build for yourself.   You don't give them a factory but you give them the output of that factory.  The result is the same : one less factory available for you.

OK, I can buy that. I think the thing that throws me is the idea that not only do you lose some Civilian Factory capacity when trading for raw materials, but that the nation you're trading with *gains your* Civilian Factory capacity. In game logic, of course, since you need to have something to trade in return for the raw materials! But it just seemed odd that in some way another nation 'gains control' over your factory -- and like you say, the better way to think about it is, they gain the output of your factory, which they in turn can use to make the things that Civilian Factories in HOI4 make -- refineries, etc.

It's still a slightly convoluted mechanic, no matter how you slice it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 10, 2016, 01:48:16 PM
How I see it is you import something in return for something the people of the other country want.  Therefore you use one or more of your factories to produce those wanted goods.  While they do this you can't use them to build for yourself.   You don't give them a factory but you give them the output of that factory.  The result is the same : one less factory available for you.

OK, I can buy that. I think the thing that throws me is the idea that not only do you lose some Civilian Factory capacity when trading for raw materials, but that the nation you're trading with *gains your* Civilian Factory capacity. In game logic, of course, since you need to have something to trade in return for the raw materials! But it just seemed odd that in some way another nation 'gains control' over your factory -- and like you say, the better way to think about it is, they gain the output of your factory, which they in turn can use to make the things that Civilian Factories in HOI4 make -- refineries, etc.

It's still a slightly convoluted mechanic, no matter how you slice it.

Yes, but I confirmed the same thing happens when you export materials...you "gain" the extra CF capacity.

It's vague and somewhat cumbersome...I imagine the 8 unit thing having to do with logistics (ie it does not make sense to send a truck / ship that is only half full) or it just approximates 1 CF to 8 RM units.

Of course IRL I'm a raw material purchaser so it makes pretty clear sense to me when abstracted.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Queeg on June 10, 2016, 01:50:53 PM

OK, I can buy that. I think the thing that throws me is the idea that not only do you lose some Civilian Factory capacity when trading for raw materials, but that the nation you're trading with *gains your* Civilian Factory capacity. In game logic, of course, since you need to have something to trade in return for the raw materials! But it just seemed odd that in some way another nation 'gains control' over your factory -- and like you say, the better way to think about it is, they gain the output of your factory, which they in turn can use to make the things that Civilian Factories in HOI4 make -- refineries, etc.

It's still a slightly convoluted mechanic, no matter how you slice it.

I think the (highly-abstracted) rationale is that Civilian Factories represent private industry, and they can either spend their time making things you want them to make or trading for things you want them to obtain.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 10, 2016, 04:10:52 PM
Some interesting play stats from paradox.....

Some fun statistics for first week:
Top nations played:
 Germany - 35%
 Italy - 13%
 Soviet - 10%
 USA - 10%
 United Kingdom - 4%
 France - 3.5%

 The most played minors seems to be China, Poland and Turkey.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 10, 2016, 04:43:41 PM
Japan is nowhere on that list - ?   C'mon people -- how's about some love for the Empire of the Rising Sun?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 10, 2016, 04:52:56 PM
I missed this piece, first big patch plans....

Right now we are working on the first proper patch that we plan to release just before vacation in july. You will get more detailed info in coming weeks but the main focus will be:
 - AI
 - Air warfare balancing
 - Making sure invasions are harder to pull off, easier to defend against and more cleverly done by AI
 - Improving peace conference scoring
 - Quality of life interface improvements
 - Bug fixing
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 10, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
Japan is nowhere on that list - ?   C'mon people -- how's about some love for the Empire of the Rising Sun?

Japan is not even in their box art!
(http://www.hoi4wiki.com/images/thumb/f/f4/Hearts_of_iron_iv_packshot.png/290px-Hearts_of_iron_iv_packshot.png)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on June 10, 2016, 05:02:11 PM
I have a lot of love for this game.  Don't listen to all of the negativity out there, if there is any about this game. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: MetalDog on June 10, 2016, 05:35:14 PM
I won't be buying.
I would love something of detail that simulates world war II
Not something like world war II or something where Japan invades Sweden at some point. There just isn't a game that simulates the whole thing in detail in a totally non abstract way.

I understand that tone is hard to read in print, so, please understand that I only mean to ask for clarification.

I am asking this of Zulu1966, but, anyone else that has an opinion, feel free to chime in.  The way I read what you wrote, you would like a game that you press Play and then WWII unfolds in front of you.  Historically and with the same outcomes.  Why would anyone want a game that plays like that?  The Germans always lose.  The Americans always come in December 7, 1941.  And on and on.  Where is the fun in that?

So, I guess what I am asking is, what do you mean by simulation?  And why would you play a game that runs almost exactly like it did in real life?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 10, 2016, 06:34:24 PM
Good in depth guide  (This is not a "quick start" guide, it's more like a manual)



This was good...learned a number of new things.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 10, 2016, 06:37:06 PM
just purchased from gmg. code iron25 still works. so paid 29.99. have never played a HOI game so no preconceived notions here. hopefully once everyone buys and learns the game we can get a multiplayer game going.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 10, 2016, 07:48:13 PM
I've always mostly played the U.S. in HOI, and for sure the pre-war U.S. stuff in this one is far more interesting than prior iterations.  (HOI 3 is on my hard drive, but unplayed, and I did a fair bit of each of the first 2 but was never really hooked on either.)  Balancing production with what you need now and what you're going to need in the future really offers endless permutations of tweaking. So much that I would say deciding exactly what to produce adn when is more of an art form: maximizing pre-war industrial research and production is more of a science, so you get various forms or problem-solving to tackle. I'm on my 3rd time through of pre-war U.S. tweaking. I'm sure I'll get to the actual combat at some point, but this is fun.  :2funny:

I am interested in watching the planner in action a bit more. In the tutorial I just set my guys to take Adis Ababa (or whatever it was they were going for) and sat back. They did a pretty good job, actually - my attack advanced on the wings and the center bounced, and the wings turned some divisions back to help out in the center while enough of the left wing continued to advance to keep the momentum of the offensive up.  I wasn't sure what would happen if I took control of divisions, but apparently it does what I would want it to do: have the divisions carry out your orders, then go back under command of the AI to execute the plan once they're finished.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 10, 2016, 08:03:25 PM
This game is so wild. Went as Finland, went communist, made a communist coup in Norway and used the military access to get a better line. Allied with russia, declared war with sweden and got half of my divisions wiped out. For some reason the Chinese came to help me and rescued my other divisions. Now Ive got a heap of finnish divisions sitting on the south of sweden poised to strike into germany.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 10, 2016, 08:24:15 PM
This game is so wild. Went as Finland, went communist, made a communist coup in Norway and used the military access to get a better line. Allied with russia, declared war with sweden and got half of my divisions wiped out. For some reason the Chinese came to help me and rescued my other divisions. Now Ive got a heap of finnish divisions sitting on the south of sweden poised to strike into germany.

Now that is an alternative history!

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 10, 2016, 09:27:19 PM
What version shall I buy?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on June 10, 2016, 10:25:00 PM
This game is so wild. Went as Finland, went communist, made a communist coup in Norway and used the military access to get a better line. Allied with russia, declared war with sweden and got half of my divisions wiped out. For some reason the Chinese came to help me and rescued my other divisions. Now Ive got a heap of finnish divisions sitting on the south of sweden poised to strike into germany.

I was about to pull the trigger until I read this. This is pure insanity. Not that Finland could invade Sweden, but that the Chinese can send a force to rescue you from across the world. This implies that logistics is almost non-existent. I won't even ask what national interest Nationalist China would have in your war with Sweden.

I am perfectly happy waiting for patches.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: WallysWorld on June 10, 2016, 11:34:13 PM
I ended up buying the Colonel Edition using the 25% off code at GMG.

Many thanks for those that posted in this thread about the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 10, 2016, 11:41:21 PM
This game is so wild. Went as Finland, went communist, made a communist coup in Norway and used the military access to get a better line. Allied with russia, declared war with sweden and got half of my divisions wiped out. For some reason the Chinese came to help me and rescued my other divisions. Now Ive got a heap of finnish divisions sitting on the south of sweden poised to strike into germany.

I was about to pull the trigger until I read this. This is pure insanity. Not that Finland could invade Sweden, but that the Chinese can send a force to rescue you from across the world. This implies that logistics is almost non-existent. I won't even ask what national interest Nationalist China would have in your war with Sweden.

I am perfectly happy waiting for patches.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on June 11, 2016, 02:39:41 AM
I'm sure it's a great game and I'm positive I will buy it. Right now I'm totally involved in Fallout 4 and have WH TW on deck, so I can easily wait out at least one big patch.

Thanks for the vids Hofstadter! I am a regular watcher.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 11, 2016, 03:26:21 AM
Regarding the wild outcomes.  EU4 also leads to those wild outcomes.  But no one complained.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 11, 2016, 03:44:09 AM
This game is so wild. Went as Finland, went communist, made a communist coup in Norway and used the military access to get a better line. Allied with russia, declared war with sweden and got half of my divisions wiped out. For some reason the Chinese came to help me and rescued my other divisions. Now Ive got a heap of finnish divisions sitting on the south of sweden poised to strike into germany.

I was about to pull the trigger until I read this. This is pure insanity. Not that Finland could invade Sweden, but that the Chinese can send a force to rescue you from across the world. This implies that logistics is almost non-existent. I won't even ask what national interest Nationalist China would have in your war with Sweden.

I am perfectly happy waiting for patches.

Not sure about China's interest, but from the video I see four Chinese divisions inside Sweden which is consistent with the 'Send Volunteers' option. It's the same option where you can send troops to the Spanish Civil War to fight (and control them yourself). It's based on a limited number of Divisions (some kind of percentage of your total forces). As Germany, I could only send 2 divisions into Nationalist Spain.

What bothers me is that the Soviet Union gave access to China and I see dozens of Nat China divs swarming through China. This is the Military Access bug and has already been reported in the Paradox forums.


As far as ahistorical behaviour, I played as Poland last night and they have an interesting National Focus Tree which goes down either established history or wildly ahistoric lines. I placed a Fascist Sympathiser on my staff in 1936 which slowly increased the Fascist Party popularity and through various focuses sent them into a majority. A civil war broke out with the country divided. Then I joined the Axis (which was possible because some of the Focuses were to suck up to Hitler) and sent a Call To Arms to The Reich. Within a month there was an Axis united Poland. The end result seems pretty wild, but how I got there was entirely plausible based on the events.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: tgb on June 11, 2016, 04:37:59 AM


As far as ahistorical behaviour, I played as Poland last night and they have an interesting National Focus Tree which goes down either established history or wildly ahistoric lines. I placed a Fascist Sympathiser on my staff in 1936 which slowly increased the Fascist Party popularity and through various focuses sent them into a majority. A civil war broke out with the country divided. Then I joined the Axis (which was possible because some of the Focuses were to suck up to Hitler) and sent a Call To Arms to The Reich. Within a month there was an Axis united Poland. The end result seems pretty wild, but how I got there was entirely plausible based on the events.

Interesting.  I'll have to try that.  Did you have historical AI on or off?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Zulu1966 on June 11, 2016, 05:02:07 AM
I won't be buying.
I would love something of detail that simulates world war II
Not something like world war II or something where Japan invades Sweden at some point. There just isn't a game that simulates the whole thing in detail in a totally non abstract way.

I understand that tone is hard to read in print, so, please understand that I only mean to ask for clarification.

I am asking this of Zulu1966, but, anyone else that has an opinion, feel free to chime in.  The way I read what you wrote, you would like a game that you press Play and then WWII unfolds in front of you.  Historically and with the same outcomes.  Why would anyone want a game that plays like that?  The Germans always lose.  The Americans always come in December 7, 1941.  And on and on.  Where is the fun in that?

So, I guess what I am asking is, what do you mean by simulation?  And why would you play a game that runs almost exactly like it did in real life?

No not really - though something that plays out close to the history with variations as part of victory or not is not a problem for me. I mean something that plays out within the realms of what was possible. Japan was never going to invade Sweden - and I read somewhere that someone played as Greece and was currently in control of half of Europe. Would never happen - not in a million years in that period - so in my view you could be playing Total War Warhammer and get as much pleasure out of it.

your example of Pearl harbour is a good one - yes what would happen if the Japanese didn't attack. But that is a realistic prospect and is an interesting alternative history for all kinds of reasons. Some of the things I am reading are happening are as much fantasy as orcs and dwarfs. I also have no hope whatsoever that an AI could remotely be programmed that played anything like a sensible game in this one.

So yes - I don't mind / actually quite like alternative history but as I say some of the things I am reading suggest that for those things to be happening its just a sandbox of "factions" using WWII as a loose premise.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: MetalDog on June 11, 2016, 05:08:02 AM
Thanks for replying and clearing that up.  So you want something that loosely conforms to the overall WWII experience without the possibility of wildly ahistorical outcomes.  Makes sense.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 11, 2016, 05:13:54 AM
Interesting.  I'll have to try that.  Did you have historical AI on or off?

I had it on. The National Focuses have a whole line geared towards ideology change. I also had to 'Improve Relations' with Germany, which helped and place a Fascist on my staff (one of the Government Staff He increased Fascist Party Popularity per day).
Just a note: this is the Poland DLC, which everyone has free.

I'm all for plausibility, as well, if it makes sense. Just random changes of government would break it for me but within the context of what choices you get to steer the nation, it works.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 05:22:48 AM
What I always wonder about all this "non-historical" results is under what conditions are they achieved....personally, I haven't really seen these but certainly not saying they don't happen to some people...

But...

1)  What difficulty are they playing on?
2)  Do they have the historical focus turned on?
3)  Any chance they modded any of the data to give them an advantage?
4)  Have they found some exploit they are taken advantage of?

Sometimes I feel people try to setup/play the game in a way that brings these situations into play just so they can show everyone what they did...not saying everyone.  I am also not saying you  should "have to play" the game in a certain way to help the AI/game, but seems some folks go out of their way in an extreme way to make it happen so they can say the game is broken.  The historical vs non-historical question is always interesting......I always tend to be in the camp "anything is possible" based on chain of events and what may happen during the game, especially if you choose an earlier start date...who knows what allies you can pick up, who knows what kind of production genius you can turn out to be, who knows what kind of luck you might have, etc.  Certainly I don't want to see anything extremely crazy myself, unless there is a well thought out logical reason why it was achieved, even if unlikely, but at the same time I am not just looking to see WWII unfold again.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 05:46:03 AM
The "trade factory capacity for imported raw materials" mechanic is pretty unintuitive and makes no real-world sense that I can discern. I guess it serves its function as a game mechanic but it still kind of rubs me the wrong way all the same.

How I see it is you import something in return for something the people of the other country want.  Therefore you use one or more of your factories to produce those wanted goods.  While they do this you can't use them to build for yourself.   You don't give them a factory but you give them the output of that factory.  The result is the same : one less factory available for you.
That is my understanding - get goods in return for "something" they want - which uses a factory

I'm not sure I like the mechanic of only being able to set quantities of 8 mind...but maybe it's ok - I noticed a country was defaulting on my requirement of 8 rubber - only providing 6. I had to cancel that and look for a country that was going to provide me what I needed to maximise the use (loss) of a factory.

I don't currently get Air - but I'll get there.

Me too....I still haven't figured out the air war game yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 05:51:25 AM
What I always wonder about all this "non-historical" results is under what conditions are they achieved....personally, I haven't really seen these but certainly not saying they don't happen to some people...

But...

1)  What difficulty are they playing on?
2)  Do they have the historical focus turned on?
3)  Any chance they modded any of the data to give them an advantage?
4)  Have they found some exploit they are taken advantage of?

Sometimes I feel people try to setup/play the game in a way that brings these situations into play just so they can show everyone what they did...not saying everyone.  I am also not saying you  should "have to play" the game in a certain way to help the AI/game, but seems some folks go out of their way in an extreme way to make it happen so they can say the game is broken.  The historical vs non-historical question is always interesting......I always tend to be in the camp "anything is possible" based on chain of events and what may happen during the game, especially if you choose an earlier start date...who knows what allies you can pick up, who knows what kind of production genius you can turn out to be, who knows what kind of luck you might have, etc.  Certainly I don't want to see anything extremely crazy myself, unless there is a well thought out logical reason why it was achieved, even if unlikely, but at the same time I am not just looking to see WWII unfold again.

GR...I would add:  5) are they playing a major power or a minor country. Minors don't have their own specific focus choices and from what I've seen playing them tends to lead to the strange non-historical outcomes.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 06:12:30 AM
What I always wonder about all this "non-historical" results is under what conditions are they achieved....personally, I haven't really seen these but certainly not saying they don't happen to some people...

But...

1)  What difficulty are they playing on?
2)  Do they have the historical focus turned on?
3)  Any chance they modded any of the data to give them an advantage?
4)  Have they found some exploit they are taken advantage of?

Sometimes I feel people try to setup/play the game in a way that brings these situations into play just so they can show everyone what they did...not saying everyone.  I am also not saying you  should "have to play" the game in a certain way to help the AI/game, but seems some folks go out of their way in an extreme way to make it happen so they can say the game is broken.  The historical vs non-historical question is always interesting......I always tend to be in the camp "anything is possible" based on chain of events and what may happen during the game, especially if you choose an earlier start date...who knows what allies you can pick up, who knows what kind of production genius you can turn out to be, who knows what kind of luck you might have, etc.  Certainly I don't want to see anything extremely crazy myself, unless there is a well thought out logical reason why it was achieved, even if unlikely, but at the same time I am not just looking to see WWII unfold again.

GR...I would add:  5) are they playing a major power or a minor country. Minors don't have their own specific focus choices and from what I've seen playing them tends to lead to the strange non-historical outcomes.

That is possible too....although if that is the case, hate to limit anyone from not playing those countries (since available) so hopefully some game adjustments can be made for those situations.  I am sure some of the more popular countries will get specific focus through future DLC.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 06:14:51 AM
What version shall I buy?

Comes down to matter of preference....if you want some of the extra sprites, then Colonel edition....if you want the extra sprites plus the first two expansions, then field marshal.  Otherwise, Cadet version would be just fine...which is the actual version I went with myself.  I am sure I'll pick up the extra stuff later, if they make it available...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 11, 2016, 07:44:50 AM
In HOI3, aren't there limitations on when you can declare ware.  This seems to be a restraint on when and how often you could invade other countries.  It also made it harder for minor countries to invade neighbors early.  Is that still in effect for HOI4.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 07:53:37 AM
In HOI3, aren't there limitations on when you can declare ware.  This seems to be a restraint on when and how often you could invade other countries.  It also made it harder for minor countries to invade neighbors early.  Is that still in effect for HOI4.

yes, you have to have reason for war before you can declare.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 11, 2016, 07:58:17 AM
In HOI3, aren't there limitations on when you can declare ware.  This seems to be a restraint on when and how often you could invade other countries.  It also made it harder for minor countries to invade neighbors early.  Is that still in effect for HOI4.

If you are a fascist or communist country you can forge a war goal and go from there, but world tension has to be at a specific level.

If you are the others you get a more isolationist approach to war, such as defensive or helping an ally. If you are a major power you can sometimes follow a national focus to get a wargoal. For instance if you play as the uk you can take belgium before the axis do and make it a puppet state, but you have to follow a certain tree line
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 08:44:19 AM
Air Groups.....I have some naval bombers and fighters in Hawaii but I can't figure out how to do anything with them, i.e. set cap, patrol the surrounding zones?  IanC....where are you when I need you...!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 11, 2016, 08:46:52 AM
Air Groups.....I have some naval bombers and fighters in Hawaii but I can't figure out how to do anything with them, i.e. set cap, patrol the surrounding zones?  IanC....where are you when I need you...!

He'a too busy playing and/or making another video  ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 11, 2016, 09:18:28 AM
Air Groups.....I have some naval bombers and fighters in Hawaii but I can't figure out how to do anything with them, i.e. set cap, patrol the surrounding zones?  IanC....where are you when I need you...!

These also might help :



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 09:55:04 AM
Thanks PD....got the answers I was looking for.  Anyone who doubts the 'depth' of the game should watch the second video, it's about 9 mins. long but worth it.  I now understand the earlier criticisms about this game lacking a manual....it really needs one.

Ps. That first video is excellent as well for anyone wanting to understand the air war piece of this game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 11, 2016, 10:31:31 AM
Totally agree. Paradox really dropped the ball when they omitted to include a manual in a complex game.

I was well into the Italian tutorial campaign wondering why I was getting messages saying my pilots were just sitting in their lawn chairs drinking espresso. There  is nothing in the so-called wiki that talks about how you conduct air operations. Thank goodness for YouTube and Grogheads contributors.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 10:32:23 AM
Frankly, I don't think a traditional manual would help much.  I watched the two hour tutorial video and that was probably better than any manual.  When you start getting into really complex games like this or Command, I would rather have an encyclopedia that lets me look up specific functions and buttons.  Too many times half the manual is taken up with useless background info and fluff.  Just give me an index and a definition of buttons.  Add a detailed video and I am done.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 11, 2016, 10:42:09 AM
I think a manual for Pdox games would be of limited utility as they tend to go through a lot of changes with the release of each patch or DLC addition.

I remember trying to learn HOI III.  I came to it very late in the day when all the DLC had already been released.  This led to a lot of confusion as there were a lot of "how to" guides and videos out there (both offical and 3rd party) and a lot of them were released earlier in the game's development cycle and much of the information presented in them was no longer correct.

Having said that, HOI IV definitely needs more tutorials or an updatable, context sensitive help system so that you could click on a button and be taken to a series of documents and videos that explain in detail all the functionality and options available for the subsystem you're looking at.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 11, 2016, 10:43:11 AM
Frankly, I don't think a traditional manual would help much.  I watched the two hour tutorial video and that was probably better than any manual.  When you start getting into really complex games like this or Command, I would rather have an encyclopedia that lets me look up specific functions and buttons.  Too many times half the manual is taken up with useless background info and fluff.  Just give me an index and a definition of buttons.  Add a detailed video and I am done.

Nah, I disagree. I would rather look up the index of a manual and find instantly that on page 64 I can read how to conduct air ops rather than searching for a video and then sitting through and hour or more of it to work out the same thing. Having said that, given the lack of a manual and an incomplete wiki, videos are the next best thing.

If a manual is out of date when the game is published (there is no reason why it should be) update it and release it with the next patch.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 11:13:23 AM
Frankly, I don't think a traditional manual would help much.  I watched the two hour tutorial video and that was probably better than any manual.  When you start getting into really complex games like this or Command, I would rather have an encyclopedia that lets me look up specific functions and buttons.  Too many times half the manual is taken up with useless background info and fluff.  Just give me an index and a definition of buttons.  Add a detailed video and I am done.

Nah, I disagree. I would rather look up the index of a manual and find instantly that on page 64 I can read how to conduct air ops rather than searching for a video and then sitting through and hour or more of it to work out the same thing. Having said that, given the lack of a manual and an incomplete wiki, videos are the next best thing.

If a manual is out of date when the game is published (there is no reason why it should be) update it and release it with the next patch.

+1 The WitP:AE manual is like that...I never read it cover to cover but use it frequently to look up a specific item from the index.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 11:14:23 AM
Does no one actually read entire posts here?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 11, 2016, 11:55:07 AM
Okay, here's a question about factories. What limits me from building military factories, other than the number of slots available? I see in the wiki it costs 3600. But 3600 of what?

Now I see that civilian factories are needed to build military factories. But again, other than filling up available factory slots, is there any limitation to maxing out the number of military factories asap?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 11, 2016, 11:58:15 AM
Does no one actually read entire posts here?

LOL...oops, admittedly I missed your next to the last sentence.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 11, 2016, 12:14:06 PM
Does no one actually read entire posts here?

That's what YouTube is for. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 12:17:57 PM
Today, I decided to just take ownership of a small country and sit back to see how the world unfolded....one thing I noticed is that it is very difficult to really get a good picture on what else is happening.  USA entered the war in late '42 and a lot of casualties were happening with the country's in the war, but because of FOW and lack of intel, really could not get a good picture on what big events were happening.  I completely understand that some countries don't have much intel, but would still like a way to understand what's happening, besides the world conflict/war list screen.  Would love to know where the big battles are happening, why are the Italians enduring 1.5 million in casualties, why did certain countries decide to go to war?, etc.

Still really enjoying, but would like to see a little more information made available...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: OJsDad on June 11, 2016, 12:21:01 PM
GR, I've never understood that about HOI.  In Victoria 2 they had the newspaper articles and you knew a lot more of what was happening than you do during WWII.  What happen to all of those newspapers and news reels. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 01:25:53 PM
Today, I decided to just take ownership of a small country and sit back to see how the world unfolded....one thing I noticed is that it is very difficult to really get a good picture on what else is happening.  USA entered the war in late '42 and a lot of casualties were happening with the country's in the war, but because of FOW and lack of intel, really could not get a good picture on what big events were happening.  I completely understand that some countries don't have much intel, but would still like a way to understand what's happening, besides the world conflict/war list screen.  Would love to know where the big battles are happening, why are the Italians enduring 1.5 million in casualties, why did certain countries decide to go to war?, etc.

Still really enjoying, but would like to see a little more information made available...

Did you use spectate mode?  I was curious how it worked.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 01:36:53 PM
Today, I decided to just take ownership of a small country and sit back to see how the world unfolded....one thing I noticed is that it is very difficult to really get a good picture on what else is happening.  USA entered the war in late '42 and a lot of casualties were happening with the country's in the war, but because of FOW and lack of intel, really could not get a good picture on what big events were happening.  I completely understand that some countries don't have much intel, but would still like a way to understand what's happening, besides the world conflict/war list screen.  Would love to know where the big battles are happening, why are the Italians enduring 1.5 million in casualties, why did certain countries decide to go to war?, etc.

Still really enjoying, but would like to see a little more information made available...

Did you use spectate mode?  I was curious how it worked.

Never heard of that mode before.....if it exists, haven't come across it yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
Open the console.  Type in Observe (spectate).  Now you can look at any country and see what it is doing.  AI runs everything.  Got that from watching youtube.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 02:09:49 PM
After getting sick of the detail needed to play WITP, I swore off grand strategy games.  HOI4 has turned me around.  It is elegant and detailed without forcing you into micromanagement hell.  I can set focus and general direction and the AI produces reasonable results.  Did I say elegant?  It is a very elegant system.  Paradox sure seems like it learned from all the previous games in the series, and probably from other games as well.

I want to thank all the people who participated in this discussion.  It convinced me to buy.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 02:43:15 PM
Open the console.  Type in Observe (spectate).  Now you can look at any country and see what it is doing.  AI runs everything.  Got that from watching youtube.

Thanks, will try that later tonight when I can...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 11, 2016, 05:59:24 PM
I think a manual for Pdox games would be of limited utility as they tend to go through a lot of changes with the release of each patch or DLC addition.

I remember trying to learn HOI III.  I came to it very late in the day when all the DLC had already been released.  This led to a lot of confusion as there were a lot of "how to" guides and videos out there (both offical and 3rd party) and a lot of them were released earlier in the game's development cycle and much of the information presented in them was no longer correct.

Having said that, HOI IV definitely needs more tutorials or an updatable, context sensitive help system so that you could click on a button and be taken to a series of documents and videos that explain in detail all the functionality and options available for the subsystem you're looking at.

For me, I need a manual that explains how game mechanics work. A tutorial might tell me how to build a factory and an encyclopedia may tell me the different types and costs... but a manual will tell me WHY I want to build one and what happens when I do. I like video tutorials and encyclopedias too...no reason they can't have a manual though. They did for EUIV. I need to have a manual close by to flip through WHILE I'm playing. Also, sometimes I'm not near my computer and want to read up on how the game works.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 06:12:49 PM
I think this does a pretty good job...

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Beginner%27s_guide

http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Mechanics

I found it better than a physical manual because I could search it.  Its also built into the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 06:43:32 PM
Open the console.  Type in Observe (spectate).  Now you can look at any country and see what it is doing.  AI runs everything.  Got that from watching youtube.

Thanks, will try that later tonight when I can...

Very cool....seems to work, although limited to seeing a single country at a time, unless I am missing the command.  Would kind of like to see the entire world unmasked at once to see everything going on, are you aware if that is possible.?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rekim on June 11, 2016, 06:49:59 PM
Electronic/living rules are pretty much the norm these days. This applies to table top wargames to a lesser degree as well.

For HOI4 I found the official tutorial vids provided all the info I needed to get me started. I also watched a couple of lets plays before release.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 11, 2016, 06:50:39 PM
Open the console.  Type in Observe (spectate).  Now you can look at any country and see what it is doing.  AI runs everything.  Got that from watching youtube.

Thanks, will try that later tonight when I can...

Very cool....seems to work, although limited to seeing a single country at a time, unless I am missing the command.  Would kind of like to see the entire world unmasked at once to see everything going on, are you aware if that is possible.?

think I found it....type "fow" in console turns on/off FOW....exactly what I was looking for.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rekim on June 11, 2016, 07:09:59 PM
Okay, here's a question about factories. What limits me from building military factories, other than the number of slots available? I see in the wiki it costs 3600. But 3600 of what?

Now I see that civilian factories are needed to build military factories. But again, other than filling up available factory slots, is there any limitation to maxing out the number of military factories asap?

Building a military factory costs 3600 construction points, which are created by assigning a number of civilian factories to that particular construction. Civilian factories produce consumer goods or construction points, or can be used for trade. Base output is 5 (per day), ie. one civilian factory is going to take 720 days to build one military factory.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 11, 2016, 07:12:08 PM
Yeah, that console is pretty frickin cool and powerful.

btw, Is there anyway to build different scenarios?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 11, 2016, 08:39:00 PM
Do you guys think it would be a good idea to do a playthough as the UK. I am debating doing one as the major powers but cant really decide. My partner wants me to go as ireland.

Yeah that will go well with the 5 people fit for military service
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 11, 2016, 08:43:10 PM
Do you guys think it would be a good idea to do a playthough as the UK. I am debating doing one as the major powers but cant really decide. My partner wants me to go as ireland.

Yeah that will go well with the 5 people fit for military service

From the looks of it you know what you're doing, so go for it.

Me? I'm playing minor nations. Got my ass handed to me playing as Portugal. Now playing as Poland. Thought about even a smaller nation, but I won't play the "bigs" until I have a really good grasp on things. That could take a month or so...since....like, I'm slow in the head (at least when it comes to this game)  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 11, 2016, 09:53:05 PM
playing first game as america. focusing on carriers and subs. election in 1936, i kept roosevelt in power. started the game exporting oil to japan but cant embargo them until other conditions and focuses are researched. trying to play aggressive and not wait until 1941 to join the fray.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Tanaka on June 11, 2016, 10:08:27 PM
Gotta agree here. This is the first HOI that I have ever understood and gotten into and enjoyed playing without micro hell. Love that.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 11, 2016, 10:12:57 PM
Does no one actually read entire posts here?

I can read!!!  Whaddayou mean?   :tickedoff:  :knuppel2:     :D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 11, 2016, 10:14:30 PM
Do you guys think it would be a good idea to do a playthough as the UK. I am debating doing one as the major powers but cant really decide. My partner wants me to go as ireland.

Yeah that will go well with the 5 people fit for military service

That certainly seems like the most daunting nation to play.  Which makes it tempting, of course, but I think I'm going to at least wait til I comprehend basic functions of the game first!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on June 11, 2016, 10:53:24 PM
Okay, here's a question about factories. What limits me from building military factories, other than the number of slots available? I see in the wiki it costs 3600. But 3600 of what?

Now I see that civilian factories are needed to build military factories. But again, other than filling up available factory slots, is there any limitation to maxing out the number of military factories asap?

Building a military factory costs 3600 construction points, which are created by assigning a number of civilian factories to that particular construction. Civilian factories produce consumer goods or construction points, or can be used for trade. Base output is 5 (per day), ie. one civilian factory is going to take 720 days to build one military factory.

Ahhh, okay. Thanks for that. While complicated, it appears to be a good game mechanic requiring some strategic thinking. Mind you, once the shooting starts, factory management drops right off my radar!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 12, 2016, 03:53:50 AM


Started a UK playthrough. Will be posting them in the video thread from now on
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 12, 2016, 01:44:24 PM
Hof....nice start, keep them coming!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 12, 2016, 01:47:33 PM
How do I update my carrier fighters? I researched the 1939 P40 Warhawk which the research screen indicates is for carriers, it has the carrier icon on it. But now that it is available to build it doesn't show the carrier icon and the ones I build can't be put on carriers. My carriers still have the old Grumman FF Fifi's.  A bug or, more likely, something I missed or did wrong?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 12, 2016, 02:06:30 PM
How do I update my carrier fighters? I researched the 1939 P40 Warhawk which the research screen indicates is for carriers, it has the carrier icon on it. But now that it is available to build it doesn't show the carrier icon and the ones I build can't be put on carriers. My carriers still have the old Grumman FF Fifi's.  A bug or, more likely, something I missed or did wrong?
I think you should click the carrier icon (on the fighters research box) to start researching this.  Only after you researched it this fighter will become available in the carrier variant.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 12, 2016, 02:31:28 PM
Okay, here's another air war question that I hope one of you can answer. I'm playing as the U.S. and it's 1939 and I would like to send some fighters to the Philippines and am at a complete loss as to how that is accomplished. The game won't let me build a new air wing at the Philippine air base. My P-40's don't have the range to transfer from Guam (even if the game would let me do that) and I can't figure out a way to disassemble and send them by sea (if that's possible). I have no problem sending army units to the Philippines and history tells us that MacArthur had an air-force in place for the Japanese to practice bombing on. Why can't I send/construct an air-force in the Philippines?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 12, 2016, 03:29:03 PM
Okay, here's another air war question that I hope one of you can answer. I'm playing as the U.S. and it's 1939 and I would like to send some fighters to the Philippines and am at a complete loss as to how that is accomplished. The game won't let me build a new air wing at the Philippine air base. My P-40's don't have the range to transfer from Guam (even if the game would let me do that) and I can't figure out a way to disassemble and send them by sea (if that's possible). I have no problem sending army units to the Philippines and history tells us that MacArthur had an air-force in place for the Japanese to practice bombing on. Why can't I send/construct an air-force in the Philippines?

Ditto....I'm having the same problem.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 12, 2016, 03:30:03 PM
How do I update my carrier fighters? I researched the 1939 P40 Warhawk which the research screen indicates is for carriers, it has the carrier icon on it. But now that it is available to build it doesn't show the carrier icon and the ones I build can't be put on carriers. My carriers still have the old Grumman FF Fifi's.  A bug or, more likely, something I missed or did wrong?
I think you should click the carrier icon (on the fighters research box) to start researching this.  Only after you researched it this fighter will become available in the carrier variant.

Thanks PD....I didn't realize I had to research the carrier aspect separately....I thought the icon meant it included carrier use but I was wrong.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 12, 2016, 03:32:12 PM
Okay, here's another air war question that I hope one of you can answer. I'm playing as the U.S. and it's 1939 and I would like to send some fighters to the Philippines and am at a complete loss as to how that is accomplished. The game won't let me build a new air wing at the Philippine air base. My P-40's don't have the range to transfer from Guam (even if the game would let me do that) and I can't figure out a way to disassemble and send them by sea (if that's possible). I have no problem sending army units to the Philippines and history tells us that MacArthur had an air-force in place for the Japanese to practice bombing on. Why can't I send/construct an air-force in the Philippines?

Do you have air units in the reserve ?  You can't build a new air wing unless you have something to put in there.
I don't know if this will work but try and disband (part of) an existing air wing.  This will put those planes in to the reserve.  Now see if you can create a new air wing with your new reserve units.
This works inside your own country but could also work if you have military access to the Philippines.

If this doesn't work I have no idea what might work ...   What does the manual say  >:D ?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 12, 2016, 03:47:47 PM
Okay, here's another air war question that I hope one of you can answer. I'm playing as the U.S. and it's 1939 and I would like to send some fighters to the Philippines and am at a complete loss as to how that is accomplished. The game won't let me build a new air wing at the Philippine air base. My P-40's don't have the range to transfer from Guam (even if the game would let me do that) and I can't figure out a way to disassemble and send them by sea (if that's possible). I have no problem sending army units to the Philippines and history tells us that MacArthur had an air-force in place for the Japanese to practice bombing on. Why can't I send/construct an air-force in the Philippines?

Do you have air units in the reserve ?  You can't build a new air wing unless you have something to put in there.
I don't know if this will work but try and disband (part of) an existing air wing.  This will put those planes in to the reserve.  Now see if you can create a new air wing with your new reserve units.
This works inside your own country but could also work if you have military access to the Philippines.

If this doesn't work I have no idea what might work ...   What does the manual say  >:D ?

Yep... I've got in excess of 200 fighters in reserve and they're available if I attempt to add a wing at any airbase other than the Philippines. Works fine in Puerto Rico, Canal Zone, Guam etc. but not the Philippines.

That's the one little detail that the extensive manual seems to omit.  :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 12, 2016, 04:05:50 PM
Played as Poland....Germany invaded....Polish communists split and attacked me....I lasted 12 days.

I feel so overwhelmed in this game  :tickedoff:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 12, 2016, 04:09:28 PM
I'm able create an air wing in the Phils and add to it from reserves.  Not sure why, I only tried it in response to your post, as I had paid my respects and vamoosed in January 1936.

It's the end of '41, I just went to war on pretty much the historical timetable. I have hundreds of fighters in Hawaii and have built up my naval bases in the Cent Pac a bit. Not sure if any of that has anything at all to do with why it is letting me add new wings in the Phils, but the planes are definitely from reserves.  Heck, who knows?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Millipede on June 12, 2016, 04:19:36 PM
I'm able create an air wing in the Phils and add to it from reserves.  Not sure why, I only tried it in response to your post, as I had paid my respects and vamoosed in January 1936.

It's the end of '41, I just went to war on pretty much the historical timetable. I have hundreds of fighters in Hawaii and have built up my naval bases in the Cent Pac a bit. Not sure if any of that has anything at all to do with why it is letting me add new wings in the Phils, but the planes are definitely from reserves.  Heck, who knows?

I'm guessing that being at war makes it possible for you. I'm not at war yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 12, 2016, 06:11:04 PM
How do I update my carrier fighters? I researched the 1939 P40 Warhawk which the research screen indicates is for carriers, it has the carrier icon on it. But now that it is available to build it doesn't show the carrier icon and the ones I build can't be put on carriers. My carriers still have the old Grumman FF Fifi's.  A bug or, more likely, something I missed or did wrong?
I think you should click the carrier icon (on the fighters research box) to start researching this.  Only after you researched it this fighter will become available in the carrier variant.

Thanks PD....I didn't realize I had to research the carrier aspect separately....I thought the icon meant it included carrier use but I was wrong.

haha i made the same mistake. thought icon meant it was ready to go but you have to click it and then research that variant. was able to join allies faction and have joined the war in 1940. sent a couple of sub fleets to med sea to raid convoys and a carrier tf to english channel to search and destroy. was finally able to embargo japan and started a coup in china!! pretty sure im not min/maxing my civilian/miltary factories or making enough equipment to replace the losses im sure to incur but hey its my first game of many hopefully and im having fun learning!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Great Ajax on June 12, 2016, 06:22:36 PM
Ugh.  For the life of me, I cannot figure out this battle plan thing.  I am Germany and me and Poland are defensive allies and the Soviet Union has invaded Poland and I want to come to the aid of my allies.  I have five armies and I set a frontline with all five of them along the German-Polish border.  Then, I set an offensive line in Poland and I have all of the colorful arrows showing the attack paths of the armies.  I click on the button to execute the plan and nothing.  The Armies do not disperse to cover the initial front line - they just stay in one group in one province and they do not advance along their route of attack.  I do not know what to do to get them moving.

Trey
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 13, 2016, 02:09:38 AM
Ugh.  For the life of me, I cannot figure out this battle plan thing.  I am Germany and me and Poland are defensive allies and the Soviet Union has invaded Poland and I want to come to the aid of my allies.  I have five armies and I set a frontline with all five of them along the German-Polish border.  Then, I set an offensive line in Poland and I have all of the colorful arrows showing the attack paths of the armies.  I click on the button to execute the plan and nothing.  The Armies do not disperse to cover the initial front line - they just stay in one group in one province and they do not advance along their route of attack.  I do not know what to do to get them moving.

Trey

If I understand this correctly you have 5 armies and created one frontline but you need a frontline for each army.  In your case this means you should create five battle plans (or merge some armies).  When you look at the frontline you can see how many divisions are attached to it (a green V should appear to show they are ready and the plan is not too risky).

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: tgb on June 13, 2016, 02:27:27 AM
It takes time for divisions to get into position before starting to act on a battle plan. Also, as noted above, generals won't execute a plan that they think will be unsuccessful, although you can always nmcro-manage it yourself.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Tuna on June 13, 2016, 04:33:31 AM
Played as Poland....Germany invaded....Polish communists split and attacked me....I lasted 12 days.

I feel so overwhelmed in this game  :tickedoff:

lol, my son is playing as Poland, he just invaded the US last night. But then he thrives on these Clausewitz Engine games! I have yet to play the game myself.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Great Ajax on June 13, 2016, 04:47:07 AM
I have five front lines and five offensive lines for each of my armies and the commanders all have green check marks.  My planning bonus is maxed at 50%.  The armies sit all grouped up in a single province on their part of the front line and do not disperse to cover the entire line.  The only thing I can think of is that I am not at war with Poland but they are my ally.  Can I not send troops into Poland to help them defend against the Soviets?

Trey


Ugh.  For the life of me, I cannot figure out this battle plan thing.  I am Germany and me and Poland are defensive allies and the Soviet Union has invaded Poland and I want to come to the aid of my allies.  I have five armies and I set a frontline with all five of them along the German-Polish border.  Then, I set an offensive line in Poland and I have all of the colorful arrows showing the attack paths of the armies.  I click on the button to execute the plan and nothing.  The Armies do not disperse to cover the initial front line - they just stay in one group in one province and they do not advance along their route of attack.  I do not know what to do to get them moving.

Trey

If I understand this correctly you have 5 armies and created one frontline but you need a frontline for each army.  In your case this means you should create five battle plans (or merge some armies).  When you look at the frontline you can see how many divisions are attached to it (a green V should appear to show they are ready and the plan is not too risky).


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: tgb on June 13, 2016, 05:17:12 AM
I have five front lines and five offensive lines for each of my armies and the commanders all have green check marks.  My planning bonus is maxed at 50%.  The armies sit all grouped up in a single province on their part of the front line and do not disperse to cover the entire line.  The only thing I can think of is that I am not at war with Poland but they are my ally.  Can I not send troops into Poland to help them defend against the Soviets?

Trey

Rt-click on Poland and check your diplomatic options.  You may see one called "Send Volunteers" that's grayed-out.  I'm pretty sure you have to belong to the same faction, or at least share the same ideology, before you can do that.  World Tension may be a barrier as well.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 13, 2016, 06:34:59 AM
I have five front lines and five offensive lines for each of my armies and the commanders all have green check marks.  My planning bonus is maxed at 50%.  The armies sit all grouped up in a single province on their part of the front line and do not disperse to cover the entire line.  The only thing I can think of is that I am not at war with Poland but they are my ally.  Can I not send troops into Poland to help them defend against the Soviets?

Trey

Rt-click on Poland and check your diplomatic options.  You may see one called "Send Volunteers" that's grayed-out.  I'm pretty sure you have to belong to the same faction, or at least share the same ideology, before you can do that.  World Tension may be a barrier as well.

In diplomacy there should be an option available when your allies are at war : 'join wars'. 

The 'send volunteers' diplomatic option only allows you to send a very limited number of divisions to their aid and should only be available to non allied countries.

PS : You don't need to give another country access to your own territory if you are both at war with a third country.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Great Ajax on June 13, 2016, 05:14:49 PM
I took a look at this on the diplomacy screen.  The 'Join Wars' option is greyed out with the mouse over note 'We participate in all of Poland's War already'.  My armies sit on my border with their animated arrows nicely pointing towards the Polish-Soviet border and do nothing.

Trey 

I have five front lines and five offensive lines for each of my armies and the commanders all have green check marks.  My planning bonus is maxed at 50%.  The armies sit all grouped up in a single province on their part of the front line and do not disperse to cover the entire line.  The only thing I can think of is that I am not at war with Poland but they are my ally.  Can I not send troops into Poland to help them defend against the Soviets?

Trey

Rt-click on Poland and check your diplomatic options.  You may see one called "Send Volunteers" that's grayed-out.  I'm pretty sure you have to belong to the same faction, or at least share the same ideology, before you can do that.  World Tension may be a barrier as well.

In diplomacy there should be an option available when your allies are at war : 'join wars'. 

The 'send volunteers' diplomatic option only allows you to send a very limited number of divisions to their aid and should only be available to non allied countries.

PS : You don't need to give another country access to your own territory if you are both at war with a third country.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 13, 2016, 09:00:43 PM
never mind.....answered my own question (troop attrition)  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 14, 2016, 02:26:08 AM
I took a look at this on the diplomacy screen.  The 'Join Wars' option is greyed out with the mouse over note 'We participate in all of Poland's War already'.  My armies sit on my border with their animated arrows nicely pointing towards the Polish-Soviet border and do nothing.

Trey 

You could try this : delete all battleplans and order your divisions manually over the border.  If this works this means you can help in the war but there is something wrong with the plans (reluctant generals, troops still preparing for the plan, not enough divisions for this, ...).

Also look at the diplomacy screen for the USSR and see if you don't have anything holding you back (non-aggression pact ?  - very unlikely but you never know).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 14, 2016, 03:44:44 AM
OK so this trade thing seems to be broken on the main game.

In the tutorial I clearly saw CF increases due to exports.

Started two separate games (Japan and Germany) and I am showing a ton of exports but when i check the construction screen it shows 0 as the CF gain from trade.

I'll try to screen shot and post here and maybe to pdox.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 14, 2016, 04:03:27 AM
I have five front lines and five offensive lines for each of my armies and the commanders all have green check marks.  My planning bonus is maxed at 50%.  The armies sit all grouped up in a single province on their part of the front line and do not disperse to cover the entire line.  The only thing I can think of is that I am not at war with Poland but they are my ally.  Can I not send troops into Poland to help them defend against the Soviets?

Trey


Ugh.  For the life of me, I cannot figure out this battle plan thing.  I am Germany and me and Poland are defensive allies and the Soviet Union has invaded Poland and I want to come to the aid of my allies.  I have five armies and I set a frontline with all five of them along the German-Polish border.  Then, I set an offensive line in Poland and I have all of the colorful arrows showing the attack paths of the armies.  I click on the button to execute the plan and nothing.  The Armies do not disperse to cover the initial front line - they just stay in one group in one province and they do not advance along their route of attack.  I do not know what to do to get them moving.

Trey

If I understand this correctly you have 5 armies and created one frontline but you need a frontline for each army.  In your case this means you should create five battle plans (or merge some armies).  When you look at the frontline you can see how many divisions are attached to it (a green V should appear to show they are ready and the plan is not too risky).



Don't have the game. Is there such a thing as Defensive Line. Maybe your troops are waiting for the enemy to capture your land before moving since you set Offensive Line.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on June 14, 2016, 04:06:15 AM
In one of the videos I watched there was a line you could set for your armies to fall back to and defend.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 14, 2016, 06:14:26 AM
OK so this trade thing seems to be broken on the main game.

Not really broken : based on your trade laws part of your economy is 'reserved' for export :  ( http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Ideas#Trade_laws )
The remaining part can be used for your production or for trade.

If you hover over a resource you will notice xxx exported but 0 traded, meaning you will not get a civilian factory.
So far I managed a few times to get civilian factories from trade so I guess it works as planned.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 14, 2016, 12:17:40 PM
I will admit I'm not only a Paradox noob but also a strategy game noob, but I think this game needs some TLC from the developers. It's a neat game and has huge upswing, but someone took it out of the oven too soon.

Putting this on the shelf until they tweak it some more.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 14, 2016, 01:07:57 PM
 I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm sure there are a few bugs here and there but I don't find the game to be wacky need anything or prematurely released. You can't wait until all the bugs are out to release something because it would never be released in that case.

 You posted several times that you don't like the game and  I understand ...but what specifically are you having problems with  that you think shows the game is not finished? Maybe someone here to help it's mechanical or operator error?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 14, 2016, 01:42:20 PM
I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm sure there are a few bugs here and there but I don't find the game to be wacky need anything or prematurely released. You can't wait until all the bugs are out to release something because it would never be released in that case.

 You posted several times that you don't like the game and  I understand ...but what specifically are you having problems with  that you think shows the game is not finished? Maybe someone here to help it's mechanical or operator error?

+1  Pete D and IanC have been awesome on this thread with advice and clearing up functions that aren't intuitive or in the non-existent manual.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 14, 2016, 01:57:54 PM
I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm sure there are a few bugs here and there but I don't find the game to be wacky need anything or prematurely released. You can't wait until all the bugs are out to release something because it would never be released in that case.

 You posted several times that you don't like the game and  I understand ...but what specifically are you having problems with  that you think shows the game is not finished? Maybe someone here to help it's mechanical or operator error?

Don't think I ever said I don't like the game  :o...quite the opposite. I think it's pretty amazing, really, but I'm sure some of it (maybe more than I'm willing to admit) is my lack of experience in this genre. I'll just keep plodding along.

I agree, IanC and Pete's video's are awesome and a great help.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 14, 2016, 02:44:36 PM
Still loving HOI4 but starting to worry that I'm rapidly approaching the point where I can no longer overlook the game's most glaring weakness:  the AI.

This was bound to be the case. For a game this complex, the AI is going to remain a work in progress for a long time -- and maybe something that only large-scale mods like a "BlackICE for HOI4" or "CORE" will be able to solve.

But now that I've become pretty comfortable with most of the game's mechanics, it gets harder and harder to ignore the lack of challenge the AI provides. One of the bigger problems is that the AI doesn't build anything other than very basic infantry divisions, and *lots* of them -- and apparently doesn't even build medium or heavy tanks, just light tanks (!!). It gets frustrating to send your armies against an AI that mostly doesn't even add artillery to its divisions. They're little more than cannon fodder...

As ever with Pdox games, the initial challenge is just learning the game. But beyond that, I worry that HOI4 is just way too easy in its present state. Toughening up the AI has got to be the devs' Number 1 priority.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rekim on June 14, 2016, 06:12:19 PM
Compared with past HOI releases this one is in great shape coming out of the gates. Considering that most/all of the major features appear to be working out of the box I'm confident that the AI will be receiving some love from the devs sooner than later.

In my current game I've noticed the allies investing heavily in aircraft, subs and small amounts of armor.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 15, 2016, 07:01:53 AM
I'm not sure what you are talking about. I'm sure there are a few bugs here and there but I don't find the game to be wacky need anything or prematurely released. You can't wait until all the bugs are out to release something because it would never be released in that case.

 You posted several times that you don't like the game and  I understand ...but what specifically are you having problems with  that you think shows the game is not finished? Maybe someone here to help it's mechanical or operator error?

Don't think I ever said I don't like the game  :o...quite the opposite. I think it's pretty amazing, really, but I'm sure some of it (maybe more than I'm willing to admit) is my lack of experience in this genre. I'll just keep plodding along.

I agree, IanC and Pete's video's are awesome and a great help.

Ok. I had thought I had seen you post you didn't like it when I was looking for opinions on the game before I bought. Nothing wrong with not liking it so it wasn't a criticism. Just for me, if I don't care for a game- regardless of how much I want to like it- I have far less patience to learn it and I become more critical. So I was just recommending that you don't give up yet! Ask around for help. These paradox "Clauswitz" engine games are extremely complex. Most of the time things don't work due to some type of intended game mechanic. Give it some time
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 15, 2016, 12:42:39 PM
OK...I researched the P40 Warhawk fighter and researched the carrier variant of the P40 as well. But when I go to the construction screen and select aircraft to build, only the non-carrier Warhawk is available. I built some and tried to put them onto an existing carrier but it wouldn't allow me to.  Any suggestions about this?? Thanks.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Yskonyn on June 15, 2016, 02:31:53 PM
I think you answer is somewhere in this thread. The same problem was mentioned.
Its got to do with Carrier Ops research not being unlocked yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 16, 2016, 05:38:48 AM
Just to mention: thanks, but there might be a small misunderstanding - I didn't make any of the videos I posted. Glad to help though.


Another tip:

Air Casualties Too High?

Air missions are set to No Retreat, by default and Day & Night.

Also, if you fly night missions and/or in bad weather, you also suffer losses through accidents.

Night missions are somewhat safer, but with penalties. Some Military Staff might offset the night bombing penalties by significant amounts.
     

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 16, 2016, 05:45:14 AM
I think you answer is somewhere in this thread. The same problem was mentioned.
Its got to do with Carrier Ops research not being unlocked yet.

Thanks, but I couldn't find it buried in 36 pages of posts.  :'(   Researching carrier ops makes no sense because you start the 1936 campaign with carriers that have fighters on them.  I could be wrong though.  I just don't understand why I can't build the upgraded P40's after having researched the P40's and their carrier variant.  The problem isn't getting them onto the carriers, the problem is finding out how to get them to show up as a build option.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 16, 2016, 06:54:10 AM
I didn't make any of the videos I posted.

Neither did I.  Just some good channels you find when you spend too much time on youtube looking for guidance ... 


Re carriers :

The carrier variant of the P40 is called F3F in HOI IV.  Does this one show op in the plane production tab ?
Also try to enable outdated equipment (top of the plane production panel) if it doesn't show. 

When you start as the US in 1939 scenario do the carrier planes show up then ?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Yskonyn on June 16, 2016, 07:27:38 AM
I think you answer is somewhere in this thread. The same problem was mentioned.
Its got to do with Carrier Ops research not being unlocked yet.

Thanks, but I couldn't find it buried in 36 pages of posts.  :'(   Researching carrier ops makes no sense because you start the 1936 campaign with carriers that have fighters on them.  I could be wrong though.  I just don't understand why I can't build the upgraded P40's after having researched the P40's and their carrier variant.  The problem isn't getting them onto the carriers, the problem is finding out how to get them to show up as a build option.

Ah ok, well I don't have the game so that's all the input I could give. ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 16, 2016, 07:41:54 AM
I think you answer is somewhere in this thread. The same problem was mentioned.
Its got to do with Carrier Ops research not being unlocked yet.

Thanks, but I couldn't find it buried in 36 pages of posts.  :'(   Researching carrier ops makes no sense because you start the 1936 campaign with carriers that have fighters on them.  I could be wrong though.  I just don't understand why I can't build the upgraded P40's after having researched the P40's and their carrier variant.  The problem isn't getting them onto the carriers, the problem is finding out how to get them to show up as a build option.

Ah ok, well I don't have the game so that's all the input I could give. ;)

Got an answer on the Steam forums.  Once you research the P40 and then its carrier variant, the carrier variant is called a Grumman F3F....that's why I couldn't find it in the construction tree, I was looking for a P40 with the carrier icon.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 16, 2016, 07:46:42 AM
Yeah it's not very intuitive but each variant of a vehicle is a unique entity can be really confusing since tanks typically have 3 variants per tech level
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Tanaka on June 16, 2016, 11:17:58 AM
Just to mention: thanks, but there might be a small misunderstanding - I didn't make any of the videos I posted. Glad to help though.


Another tip:

Air Casualties Too High?

Air missions are set to No Retreat, by default and Day & Night.
  • No Retreat - Air units keep flying missions no matter the casualties. This is a highly aggressive mode only used when absolutely necessary to achieve Air Superiority for strategic objectives. Casualties are huge.
  • Low Intensity - which sets the casualty cap at 50%
  • Normal Operations - which sets the cap at 25%.

Also, if you fly night missions and/or in bad weather, you also suffer losses through accidents.

Night missions are somewhat safer, but with penalties. Some Military Staff might offset the night bombing penalties by significant amounts.
   

Thanks for this I was wondering why all of my air group were vanishing!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 16, 2016, 12:29:38 PM
The Hearts of Iron IV DLC has begun. I just received an email from Paradox to let me know Hearts of Iron IV: Sabaton Soundtrack is available for purchase. The cost is USD 2.99.

From the email I received:

Hearts of Iron IV: Sabaton Soundtrack!

Play your favorite game Hearts of Iron IV with WWII themed music!

Following on the success of the popular DLC soundtrack for Europa Universalis IV, we are happy to continue our musical partnership with Swedish power metal band Sabaton, a group best known for its music that illustrates great episodes of history.

This time, we've added five of Sabatons World War II themed songs for Hearts of Iron IV. The songs included in this content pack are:

1. Hearts of Iron: dedicated to German 9th and 12th armies that covered the escape of citizens fleeing the Soviets to safety with the Western armies
2. Primo Victoria: dedicated to Operation Overlord and the Western Front
3. Stalingrad: dedicated to the Soviet soldiers who died fighting to defend Stalingrad
4. Wolfpack: dedicated to victims and survivors of the attack on convoy ON-92
5. Night Witches: dedicated to a deadly Soviet bomber crew composed of women

Click the button below to read more about the soundtrack and to place your order for a copy. Don't forget that you can collect the key directly on your Paradox Account!


Button (https://www.paradoxplaza.com/hearts-of-iron-iv-sabaton-soundtrack?utm_source=Community%20Newsletter&ticket=ST-YXvLQt3dC2_wYe0xYVJvtQfLfNQJx)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 16, 2016, 01:14:51 PM
Why does it feel like they'll DLC this game into the ground?  :tickedoff:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 16, 2016, 01:28:47 PM
Why does it feel like they'll DLC this game into the ground?  :tickedoff:

Because that's their business model and it works exceptionally well.  Paradox do DLC the correct way in my opinion.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on June 16, 2016, 02:07:35 PM
Yeah, they've been following this model for quite some time now.  I don't think it should come as a surprise to anyone used to PDox games at this point that we're looking at dozens of DLC releases for HOI IV.  I usually wait for a sale and pick and choose which I want.  I never bother with the music ones personally and only tend to grab the graphics ones if they're included in a bundle with others but I'll always snap up the ones that add new gameplay elements.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 16, 2016, 02:17:44 PM
This Sabaton DLC is already included with the pre-order packages.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on June 16, 2016, 03:19:07 PM
I bet those who pre-ordered are glad they got it free. ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 16, 2016, 04:18:10 PM
I think you answer is somewhere in this thread. The same problem was mentioned.
Its got to do with Carrier Ops research not being unlocked yet.

Thanks, but I couldn't find it buried in 36 pages of posts.  :'(   Researching carrier ops makes no sense because you start the 1936 campaign with carriers that have fighters on them.  I could be wrong though.  I just don't understand why I can't build the upgraded P40's after having researched the P40's and their carrier variant.  The problem isn't getting them onto the carriers, the problem is finding out how to get them to show up as a build option.

Ah ok, well I don't have the game so that's all the input I could give. ;)

Got an answer on the Steam forums.  Once you research the P40 and then its carrier variant, the carrier variant is called a Grumman F3F....that's why I couldn't find it in the construction tree, I was looking for a P40 with the carrier icon.

WTF!  A sexy plane becomes a fat one?  Why do you need to research the P40 first instead of just going straignt to the F3F?  Isn't it a derivative of the F2F?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/F3F-1_4-F-7_Jax.jpg/300px-F3F-1_4-F-7_Jax.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F3F

Now if say in theory the P40 naval model won the selection and was designated as F3F by the Navy then it should be Curtiss F3F.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Wl8MNJnQMCw/Uz5zBN5cyqI/AAAAAAABBrY/nUwKPd2dwcY/s1600/57FGRanger001a.jpg) 
http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.sg/2011/02/curtiss-p-40-em-porta-avioes.html
Picture above is not an actual naval P40.  They just took off from the carrier to rebase in Africa.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 16, 2016, 05:20:06 PM
Now if say in theory the P40 naval model won the selection and was designated as F3F by the Navy then it should be Curtiss F3F.

Well, not exactly sure what it would've been, but would not have been "F3F" -- the navy's system for designating aircraft was kind of convoluted -- the letter at the end stood for the corporation that built the aircraft, in this case, "F" stands for "Grumman" -- another example, the "F4U Corsair" where "U" stands for "Vought," the company manufacturer, "F2A Buffalo" where "A" is for "Brewster" corp., etc.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 16, 2016, 05:21:47 PM
Yeah. That tech tree doesn't make sense. Anyway I'm still keeping my eye on that game.  Will buy it pretty soon.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 16, 2016, 05:59:26 PM
This Sabaton DLC is already included with the pre-order packages.

Strange...was not included with my pre-order.  It was made available for purchase pretty much since day one, but not included what I ended up getting...maybe it was a certain pre order package.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 16, 2016, 06:01:26 PM
Why does it feel like they'll DLC this game into the ground?  :tickedoff:

Because that's their business model and it works exceptionally well.  Paradox do DLC the correct way in my opinion.

Exactly....why anybody would seem surprised by this based on other Paradox games and it likely had been mentioned a ton of times in this thread alone, is beyond me.  I like the model as well.  Buy what you want......or don't buy anything....your call.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 16, 2016, 07:56:33 PM
Why does it feel like they'll DLC this game into the ground?  :tickedoff:

Because that's their business model and it works exceptionally well.  Paradox do DLC the correct way in my opinion.

Exactly....why anybody would seem surprised by this based on other Paradox games and it likely had been mentioned a ton of times in this thread alone, is beyond me.  I like the model as well.  Buy what you want......or don't buy anything....your call.

This is my second Paradox game, so I'm not familiar with their selling tactics.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 17, 2016, 03:55:11 AM
Why does it feel like they'll DLC this game into the ground?  :tickedoff:

Because that's their business model and it works exceptionally well.  Paradox do DLC the correct way in my opinion.

Exactly....why anybody would seem surprised by this based on other Paradox games and it likely had been mentioned a ton of times in this thread alone, is beyond me.  I like the model as well.  Buy what you want......or don't buy anything....your call.

This is my second Paradox game, so I'm not familiar with their selling tactics.

Look at dlc content for either CK2 or EU4.

Expect same for Stellaris and HoI4

Rinse and repeat

My only fear is that they will pull an EA and start removing critical / standard components from their games and make you pay extra for them. Diplomacy in Stellaris is especially thin. Also if they go nickle and dime on the dlc (such as charging for each country if you want to buy political focus dlc)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Lowenstaat on June 17, 2016, 04:02:18 AM
This game features some deep game-play. After playing the Italy tutorial last week, this week I decided to pick a small country with which to experiment and learn the political, economic, and war-fighting  systems on my own. I surveyed the map and thought, "Ah, Afghanistan looks harmless enough and out of the way so it won't get squashed by the larger powers. I'll play the Afghans on easy for a bit, just enough to learn the basics."

After a few play sessions (a few years of game time starting in 1936) I'd upgraded Afghanistan's militia military with some infantry divisions and cavalry divisions, had a good grasp on production and the economics model, and dabbled with diplomacy a little. Then I decided to see what would happen if I sparked a domestic democracy movement. The ruling monarchy publicly agreed to consider elections sometime in the future, while privately doing all they could to stall. Fearing a loss on influence and status a rapid move to democracy casue, a group of elites organized a reactionary fascist movement which eventfully seized power and established the New Afghan Khanate.

Needless to say, I was invested in the outcome of Afghanistan beyond my original goal of just messing around to learn the game systems better.  By mid 1946, the New Afghan Khanate had created a fascist coup in neighboring Iran, supplied weapons to the  Iranian fascists in their civil war, intervened in that conflict militarily to prevent the destruction of the Iranian fascists, and formed a new faction called the Shia Khanate with the New Persian Empire that successfully supplanted the old Iranian monarchy.

During those gaming sessions I learned a great deal about managing and equipping armies, keeping Afghan's small air force in the air, using politics to influence domestic and international events to the nation's benefit, and how to turn research into practical applications for industry, infrastructure, and the military. Sadly, there was no Afghan navy, so those lessons will have to wait for another play through with a nation that actually has a coastline.

What I did not expect was to walk away from what I'd intended to be a simple learning game with an involved story about a small country getting swept up in its own internal politics and then "exporting" those ideals to its neighbor.

By the way, I played with the historical setting on and observed that events in the world at large proceeded similar to World War Two, until the Soviet Union attacked Finland who'd previously joined the Allies. The result was a few years of hot war with the Allies fighting both the Axis and the Comintern. But, Germany never invaded the USSR so there was no fighting between the Axis and the Comintern. Also, Italy conquered half of Africa. By mid 1945 it appeared the major powers had stopped fighting in Europe having shifted their war efforts to Central America, Asia, and Africa. It looked like the belligerents of Europe had settled into a sort of cold war
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Lowenstaat on June 17, 2016, 04:31:17 AM
Here are some YouTube playlists that I've found very helpful:

Praetorian HiJynx's Hearts of Iron 4 Guide
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAApFmDUfwlcrFnNRTBcBx_-Xd5oHOM7p (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAApFmDUfwlcrFnNRTBcBx_-Xd5oHOM7p)
Particularly his Land Unit Types & Division Designs video helped me understand how division composition affects battlefield frontage. He recommends organizing divisions with frontages of 20 or 14 to 20 if you expect to be fighting in more restrictive terrain. If I understand correctly that means an offensive launched across clear terrain will have a total frontage of 80 meaning 4 units with frontages of 20 are the max that can fight at once at the front line. Units from neighboring provinces may support the attack through frontages of 40 per province, so 2 units with frontages of 20 each could support from adjacent provinces.

Bridger's Hearts of Iron IV Beginner's Guide [HOI4 Tutorial]
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkQMBP16-XLEVHqSC4CM82aHB10OaG9-T (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkQMBP16-XLEVHqSC4CM82aHB10OaG9-T)
These are pre-release videos, but they are full of clearly explained information and very concise. I found his Battle Plans video and his Laws and Staff video to help me the most.

Bridger's Hearts of Iron IV Hints, Tips, and Tricks
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkQMBP16-XLH-NkRNlw5KbauYfJw2z97J (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkQMBP16-XLH-NkRNlw5KbauYfJw2z97J)
Again, very clear and concise if you don't have time to watch hours of play through and lets play videos.

Finally, this wiki page presents a thorough layout of sub units that make up divisions:
http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units (http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Land_units) 
I thought I was a major Table of Organization and Equipment  (TOE) geek until I saw the link at the bottom of this page to a Division Calculator someone has created fro HOI IV. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 17, 2016, 04:49:48 AM
lol - what speed do you people play at? Am I exclusively in the camp of mostly playing at the lowest speed?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Lowenstaat on June 17, 2016, 05:03:53 AM
I started on the slowest speed, but mid-game with Afghanistan was a little boring so I sped up to 3-normal speed. When the war in Iran kicked off, I dropped back to slow. I often pause the game to set battle plans, manage production, or respond to alert icons or popups. I play all of Paradox's grand strategy games like they're turned based, pausing to make decisions, develop strategies, or just let my imagination read more into events in the game. I think if I'd just played on fast I would have missed some of the political flavor of my Afghan play through.

My wife, on the other hand, plays Stellaris and Crusader Kings II on fast. Drives me crazy to watch her play that fast. But, she is a much better multitasker than I am. We'd play multiplayer more on those two games if we could just agree on the same speed. But normal is too fast for me and too slow for her!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on June 17, 2016, 06:17:30 AM
lol - I simply cannot keep up on any other speed. I admit I do very occasionally fast forward but it's normally a slow game for me!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 17, 2016, 06:17:46 AM
I started on the slowest speed, but mid-game with Afghanistan was a little boring so I sped up to 3-normal speed. When the war in Iran kicked off, I dropped back to slow. I often pause the game to set battle plans, manage production, or respond to alert icons or popups. I play all of Paradox's grand strategy games like they're turned based, pausing to make decisions, develop strategies, or just let my imagination read more into events in the game. I think if I'd just played on fast I would have missed some of the political flavor of my Afghan play through.

My wife, on the other hand, plays Stellaris and Crusader Kings II on fast. Drives me crazy to watch her play that fast. But, she is a much better multitasker than I am. We'd play multiplayer more on those two games if we could just agree on the same speed. But normal is too fast for me and too slow for her!

Lowenstaat...your Bridger youtube links posted above are excellent, especially his air and army units organization vids....so much depth I didn't realize was there.  Thanks for sharing.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 17, 2016, 07:16:48 AM
Patch incoming end of June: Patch 1.1 "Red Ball Express"

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-june-17th-patch-1-1-red-ball-express.949237/



Major Points directly quoted from the post by Podcat:

Access to allied territory
One of the biggest talked about issue has been the fact that as long as you fight the same enemy you automatically gain military access, even from other factions. This was kind of a bandaid for an old issue, and we never liked it either... so we have been listening and working on a solution. The way things work now is that you will be requiring military access as expected and the game will also alert you if you end up in a position where you are trying to move into occupied area you don't have access to (as this for democracies would liberate those nations you will need to ask for permissions, which ai will give you). We are still testing our solution, so there might be further changes still.

Peace conferences
We fixed a serious issue where instead of taking turns in a peace deal when there were 2 major contributors it would instead end up so that the 2nd of those gets to push through almost all changes in the peace deal. This could lead to some really weird peace deals. Now you will instead get to take turns (as well as do a little more per turn if you are close in points). Hopefully this should make peaces feel a lot more sane and rewarding.

Invasions and Naval bombers
When it comes to invasions and ease of reinforcing invasions into Germany we have now made Naval Bombers able to attack troop transports (before only fleets could stop them, which isn't a great option for Germany when facing the royal navy obviously), so you only really want to do invasions with sufficient control over the skies. AI has also been tweaked to prefer several larger invasions at once to pose more of a threat to players and bleed less troops in smaller invasions. I've also been looking at general balance around naval bomber and other air war being a bit too bloody, but I'll give you an update on that next week instead because it's not done.

AI
When it comes to further AI improvements, I'll hand over the mic to SteelVolt:

This path we have taken a look at some things in the AI where relatively small effort would give a rather big payoff. A lot of this focus was around mistakes Germany was making, such as building too many dock yards and thus lagging behind in the production of military factories. Another thing we discovered that Germany did was to start using the Austrian division designs after the Anschluss, due to looking at the latest date edited. Both of these have been taken care of, but we have also looked at how to make them not rush the maginot line without making large changes that could break other cases.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 17, 2016, 07:19:00 AM
lol - what speed do you people play at? Am I exclusively in the camp of mostly playing at the lowest speed?

Speed 4 in peacetime, 2 when at war.

Getting to 1940 starting in 1936 took me a couple of evenings of micromanagement in HOI3.  Now one evening gets me to the start of the war.
Don't think I will ever go back to HOI3.

DasTactic also has a nice in depth guide available : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGB6RkFB7ZmPxVlR8oy_-CrlFNox8O1t6
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 17, 2016, 02:01:26 PM
lol - what speed do you people play at? Am I exclusively in the camp of mostly playing at the lowest speed?

Nope, I'm right there with you, JD.  I almost never go above "3" and once war breaks out, definitely spend most of my time on "1" ( = lowest).  I also disable the day/night cycle, although occasionally leave it on if closely monitoring a particular battle/operation.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on June 17, 2016, 02:32:24 PM
I think it depends on who you play as. As Brazil I run it above 3 a lot because so little happens. Of course, I suspect that could change later in the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Wolfe1759 on June 17, 2016, 04:00:54 PM
lol - I simply cannot keep up on any other speed. I admit I do very occasionally fast forward but it's normally a slow game for me!

"In War: 1-2 . In Defeat: 1-2. In Victory: 2-3. In Peace: 2-5." - (not) Winston Churchill  :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 17, 2016, 04:20:12 PM
lol - I simply cannot keep up on any other speed. I admit I do very occasionally fast forward but it's normally a slow game for me!

"In War: 1-2 . In Defeat: 1-2. In Victory: 2-3. In Peace: 2-5." - (not) Winston Churchill  :)

(I smoked) 2 joints in morning, 2 at night...I smoked 2 joints in times of peace and 2 at war....

-Sublime
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 17, 2016, 04:28:02 PM
Isn't that Sublime?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 17, 2016, 06:14:03 PM
lol - I simply cannot keep up on any other speed. I admit I do very occasionally fast forward but it's normally a slow game for me!

"In War: 1-2 . In Defeat: 1-2. In Victory: 2-3. In Peace: 2-5." - (not) Winston Churchill  :)

(I smoked) 2 joints in morning, 2 at night...I smoked 2 joints in times of peace and 2 at war....

-Sublime
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 17, 2016, 07:09:59 PM
Crap...missed that
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 17, 2016, 08:12:29 PM
Crap...missed that

 :D

All good man.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 18, 2016, 01:33:09 PM
As The Reich, has anyone tried Sealion / the  invasion of the UK yet?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 18, 2016, 08:43:18 PM
anyone else getting missing tooltips? lower right hand corner has options for several things and it did give a tooltip when you hovered over them. now all they do is show the shortcut key, no tooltip.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 18, 2016, 09:03:49 PM
anyone else getting missing tooltips? lower right hand corner has options for several things and it did give a tooltip when you hovered over them. now all they do is show the shortcut key, no tooltip.

Mine still shows tooltips in that area of the screen...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on June 18, 2016, 09:04:20 PM
I am hugely impressed with this game, after having some post-release doubts. To me, they just did the right things to the right areas without altering the core formula too much. They made some things more realistic and others more abstract. For instance, they made production more realistic with the players running production lines for various equipment and you have troops in a basic training pipeline. They do it skillfully and I find it a massive improvement over previous iterations. In other areas, like the naval and air war, they abstracted it more. To me, its simpler and more realistic.

The only problem I am having at the moment is the AI. It doesn't do a good job of judging what fronts need what troops. Playing as the USSR, Germany (through mid-41 so far) is not garrisoning the border with me. While I have no doubt they will unleash all hell upon me if I stab them in the back, I will be most of the way to Berlin before they can likely stop me. It is disappointing to a degree, but in the long run I am not worried. It will be patched up and the AI will give me a challenge at some point and probably sooner rather than later.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 18, 2016, 09:24:38 PM
anyone else getting missing tooltips? lower right hand corner has options for several things and it did give a tooltip when you hovered over them. now all they do is show the shortcut key, no tooltip.

Mine still shows tooltips in that area of the screen...

hmm okay. will check all my settings again. thought their last patch messed things up.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 19, 2016, 01:23:43 AM
Ok.  So what's a nice obscure country to start with?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 19, 2016, 02:02:32 AM
Ok.  So what's a nice obscure country to start with?

Brazil to take over SA. Australia for oceania. Greece for europe
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 19, 2016, 02:43:30 AM
I took Communist China. I just realised there aren't a lot of independent nations compared to EU. Less interesting starts.

So I joined the Comintern, declared war on Japan when he declared war on China. Then the Russians go rampaging into Manchukuo and Korea. Liberating provinces under my name. :) Japan is still in the fright.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 19, 2016, 04:58:45 AM
I am hugely impressed with this game, after having some post-release doubts. To me, they just did the right things to the right areas without altering the core formula too much. They made some things more realistic and others more abstract. For instance, they made production more realistic with the players running production lines for various equipment and you have troops in a basic training pipeline. They do it skillfully and I find it a massive improvement over previous iterations. In other areas, like the naval and air war, they abstracted it more. To me, its simpler and more realistic.

The only problem I am having at the moment is the AI. It doesn't do a good job of judging what fronts need what troops. Playing as the USSR, Germany (through mid-41 so far) is not garrisoning the border with me. While I have no doubt they will unleash all hell upon me if I stab them in the back, I will be most of the way to Berlin before they can likely stop me. It is disappointing to a degree, but in the long run I am not worried. It will be patched up and the AI will give me a challenge at some point and probably sooner rather than later.


I agree with everything you say. Apparently the AI is getting work on the first patch and will continue to improve according to official posts.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 19, 2016, 08:33:21 AM
anyone else getting missing tooltips? lower right hand corner has options for several things and it did give a tooltip when you hovered over them. now all they do is show the shortcut key, no tooltip.

Mine still shows tooltips in that area of the screen...

hmm okay. will check all my settings again. thought their last patch messed things up.

figured it out. the UI scaling was set to 1.1.  I changed it back to 1.0 and the tooltips reappeared.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on June 19, 2016, 10:28:53 AM
anyone else getting missing tooltips? lower right hand corner has options for several things and it did give a tooltip when you hovered over them. now all they do is show the shortcut key, no tooltip.

Mine still shows tooltips in that area of the screen...

hmm okay. will check all my settings again. thought their last patch messed things up.

figured it out. the UI scaling was set to 1.1.  I changed it back to 1.0 and the tooltips reappeared.

Good to know...haven't messed with the scaling options yet so haven't seen the impacts of changing it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 19, 2016, 04:00:56 PM
Helpful Theatre Icons Mod. A NATO Army/Corps/Division/Brigade/Regiment one would be nice too...

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=703017353

(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/272846079129871222/F1F66B6E3EF9D42391CA724CE3CB626E7EBA3252/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside|637:358&composite-to=*,*|637:358&background-color=black)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 19, 2016, 06:55:02 PM
So I can't use my captured provinces until a peace conference?  Looks like still a long way to go. Must take Japan Home Islands after liberating China? I don't have a navy and air force. I guess I'm stuck with 2 provinces for the rest of the war and Nationalist China and USSR would probably get the most war score.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 20, 2016, 03:32:37 AM
So I can't use my captured provinces until a peace conference?  Looks like still a long way to go. Must take Japan Home Islands after liberating China? I don't have a navy and air force. I guess I'm stuck with 2 provinces for the rest of the war and Nationalist China and USSR would probably get the most war score.

Peace Deals are being updated/fixed in the coming patch.


More Variants Mod
I don't know about balance but this looks interesting:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=704622378

(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/442857699526419812/0D307A7EC98A062EA658FFDBD70F3A65A06A5659/)


German Infantry Reskin:

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=705298469


(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/257084214440710609/3649D813551A5ACD9A9275E3047E6CC58EA2A26C/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside|637:358&composite-to=*,*|637:358&background-color=black)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 20, 2016, 03:48:05 AM
Yeah peace deals lead to strange outcomes.  I see people complaining about getting screwed by results. The losing countries surrenders to some obscure country or those who are perceived to not "participate much".
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 20, 2016, 04:34:57 AM
I had a peculiar situation that required me to give up and start a new game.

So, I'm playing as Germany. I have about 40 divisions fighting their way through Yugoslavia and another 60 working their way through Poland. This left me with only a handful of divisions guarding the border with France, with whom I was at war. Anyway, the Soviet Union also declares war on Poland. We have signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. At some point, the Reds declare war on France and/or the Netherlands. Before I know it, 60 to 100 Soviet Divisions are racing through Germany toward the Maginot Line! At no point did I grant military access to my territory, so unless the M/R Pact permits this, which it shouldn't, the Russians should not have been able to enter my territory without a declaration of war and we were not at war, nor were we allied. Eventually, Yugoslavia and Poland capitulate. Unfortunately, even though my forces had captured Warsaw, Poland surrenders to the Russians and the conquered territory gets distributed in a bizarre patchwork way between Germany and Russia.

Anyway, with the vast majority of my army in the east, and a massive Soviet build up within my own territory on my Western border, I didn't see any way to carry on. So the six million dollar question is, WTF....how were the Russians able to violate my borders and literally walk across Germany to confront the French/Dutch?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 20, 2016, 05:16:18 AM
So the six million dollar question is, WTF....how were the Russians able to violate my borders and literally walk across Germany to confront the French/Dutch?

It's the Military Access bug. Apparently being included with the coming patch:

Quote
Access to allied territory
One of the biggest talked about issue has been the fact that as long as you fight the same enemy you automatically gain military access, even from other factions. This was kind of a bandaid for an old issue, and we never liked it either... so we have been listening and working on a solution. The way things work now is that you will be requiring military access as expected and the game will also alert you if you end up in a position where you are trying to move into occupied area you don't have access to (as this for democracies would liberate those nations you will need to ask for permissions, which ai will give you). We are still testing our solution, so there might be further changes still.

Link to full post: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-june-17th-patch-1-1-red-ball-express.949237/


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 20, 2016, 05:19:55 AM
Wow. That's pretty atrocious. Thanks.

Sounds like it's not a bug, but a solution to an issue that they could not figure out a better approach. I hope their efforts to address it in the upcoming patch are successful.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 20, 2016, 08:58:11 AM
I haven't play the game much, maybe 20 hours (mainly as Mexico, Spain and a couple other minor's) and after reading a lot of what others are experiencing with playing as the majors I'm going to stick this game on the shelf (well, there are more reasons than this.....getting married in 30 days, work getting busier and summer being here).

I think the upcoming patches will make this game ever better and I can't wait for some more mods to come out. There are already some nice cosmetic ones out there.

All in all, this game is really neat but has so much more potential.

Really appreciate this thread and all your comments and tips. It has helped out this NOOB PDX/strategy gamer immensely!!!  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 20, 2016, 09:39:23 AM
^condolences on the wedding.  ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on June 20, 2016, 10:22:30 AM
^condolences on the wedding.  ;)

LMAO :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 20, 2016, 11:18:45 AM
^condolences on the wedding.  ;)

HAHAHA!

That's the same thing all my married buddies have said.

47yr old and this is my first go around. I waited to get everything out of my system (except gaming.....and she's good about my gaming time)

 O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on June 20, 2016, 03:00:10 PM
Yeah the game currently has a lot of flows that cannot be simply ignored. So I have to shelf it for a while maybe for a couple of major patches, even though I really enjoyed toying with all new mechanism.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 20, 2016, 03:19:28 PM
I'm still going to toy with it, but yeah...as Germany at least, its frustrating to lose years of game time effort to a silly exploit like the one I described above. They MUST fix this.

I don't recall this happening in any of the other HOI titles, but then again, in all of my games, I have never seen Russia declare war against any of the allied powers.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 21, 2016, 10:07:33 AM
I saw this on Reddit and found it helpful as a beginner to HOI overall.  I had played HOI3 a little but was completely overwhelmed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/4ndo3r/over_200_tips_for_new_players/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 21, 2016, 01:33:58 PM
9:00 April 8 1942. I'm the U.S. player. Iron Man game mode. Pay particular attention to my air power on those Carriers.

Anyone want to guess the outcome?



(http://orig13.deviantart.net/954f/f/2016/173/5/c/8_apr_42_by_jack_o_tales-da787lj.jpg)


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 21, 2016, 01:40:00 PM
Wow, that makes the Battle of Midway look like child's play.

Also, what on earth are you doing with a 7 CV task force patrolling off the coast of ... Nagasaki??  Are you near to defeating Japan? (Although I suspect a Japan near defeat wouldn't have 6 CV and 9 BB at its disposal...).

Given the huge advantage Japan has in terms of surface vessels, I'm guessing you got your clock cleaned here? Or maybe not -- looks like Japan has a serious malus going on with its aircraft (although you don't appear to be suffering from the same).  ...and you have 178 torp. bombers... Hmmmm...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 21, 2016, 01:43:24 PM
I knew the enemy fleet with 6 carriers was around that area and waded in. I didn't know the exact force though. I didn't take the weather and number of aircraft into account for my naval air ops and I lost all 7 carriers and 2 Battleships. I was counting on my naval air power but the weather was crap and there were 'too many' aircraft present resulting in some kind of negative modifier. Those 9 Japanese BB's closed in as well as 80 DD's with torpedo attacks and that was it. It's going to take a good 3+ years at least to replace those carriers and BB's. All because I knew a major Japanese fleet was present in that area and I wanted a decisive outcome. I got one. It was a terrible opportunistic decision resulting in a catastrophe. I was fixated on taking out those 6 CV's.

I'm on Ironman, which I've played for several days from 1936 onwards. I'm undecided whether to continue and tough it out or restart. Staying with it would be interesting but I can't really rationalise the ineptitude of my naval skill. Chester Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake. Until the patch I guess I'm just 'training' anyway.

I've found Ironman mode is a great way to play as it really makes the game quite dramatic and deep. You screw up. It's permanent. You win, and it's a big deal.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 21, 2016, 02:35:57 PM
I knew the enemy fleet with 6 carriers was around that area and waded in. I didn't know the exact force though. I didn't take the weather and number of aircraft into account for my naval air ops and I lost all 7 carriers and 2 Battleships. I was counting on my naval air power but the weather was crap and there were 'too many' aircraft present resulting in some kind of negative modifier. Those 9 Japanese BB's closed in as well as 80 DD's with torpedo attacks and that was it. It's going to take a good 3+ years at least to replace those carriers and BB's. All because I knew a major Japanese fleet was present in that area and I wanted a decisive outcome. I got one. It was a terrible opportunistic decision resulting in a catastrophe. I was fixated on taking out those 6 CV's.

I'm on Ironman, which I've played for several days from 1936 onwards. I'm undecided whether to continue and tough it out or restart. Staying with it would be interesting but I can't really rationalise the ineptitude of my naval skill. Chester Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake. Until the patch I guess I'm just 'training' anyway.

I've found Ironman mode is a great way to play as it really makes the game quite dramatic and deep. You screw up. It's permanent. You win, and it's a big deal.

I just parked my 7 carriers in a blocking position south of Midway and waited for them to come after me.  Finally, they did - with ONE carrier (Hiryu).  The expected happened.

To Sandman: it's not that hard to have 7 or even more carriers active by early '42.  You can build Yorktown-class carriers from '36 and if you really put your back into building them and their air complements, I'm sure you could have 10 or more by that time.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 21, 2016, 02:37:02 PM
Lost all 7 carriers?  Oh the humanity!

Seriously that is a huge bummer. I'm not sure I'd have the heart (ha) to carry on after such a catastrophe. Sign the instruments of surrender and start again.   8)

Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake... but Halsey might have  ;)  (A cheap shot, admittedly. Halsey was a great commander.)

@glen -- I wasn't marveling at the number of CVs so much as Ian's decision to park his task force right off the coast of Japan in 1942!  The man has balls.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 21, 2016, 03:14:36 PM
I wasn't marveling at the number of CVs so much as Ian's decision to park his task force right off the coast of Japan in 1942!  The man has balls.

I wouldn't say balls though...more like overconfidence and not being totally familiar with the ways of the game as yet!
I was hoping that I could do some real harm with my carrier's air power before the rest of their fleet could close, but the weather and too many aircraft were my undoing. It was a very costly mistake.

One thing about the weather - I really like the way that it's depicted directly on-map. It really adds deep immersion for me.
In a new Ironman game as The Reich in '39, I set up my forces for Case White and on 29th August it started to rain. And rain. And more rain. And then storms.
It was the 12th September before I launched the campaign but it was great. I loved every second of not being able to do anything. There are indeed some issues, some rough edges but I really freaking love this game. The map on a good graphics card set to max is very pretty. I wish there was some way to rotate the camera.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 21, 2016, 05:14:03 PM
I knew the enemy fleet with 6 carriers was around that area and waded in. I didn't know the exact force though. I didn't take the weather and number of aircraft into account for my naval air ops and I lost all 7 carriers and 2 Battleships. I was counting on my naval air power but the weather was crap and there were 'too many' aircraft present resulting in some kind of negative modifier. Those 9 Japanese BB's closed in as well as 80 DD's with torpedo attacks and that was it. It's going to take a good 3+ years at least to replace those carriers and BB's. All because I knew a major Japanese fleet was present in that area and I wanted a decisive outcome. I got one. It was a terrible opportunistic decision resulting in a catastrophe. I was fixated on taking out those 6 CV's.

I'm on Ironman, which I've played for several days from 1936 onwards. I'm undecided whether to continue and tough it out or restart. Staying with it would be interesting but I can't really rationalise the ineptitude of my naval skill. Chester Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake. Until the patch I guess I'm just 'training' anyway.

I've found Ironman mode is a great way to play as it really makes the game quite dramatic and deep. You screw up. It's permanent. You win, and it's a big deal.

I just parked my 7 carriers in a blocking position south of Midway and waited for them to come after me.  Finally, they did - with ONE carrier (Hiryu).  The expected happened.

To Sandman: it's not that hard to have 7 or even more carriers active by early '42.  You can build Yorktown-class carriers from '36 and if you really put your back into building them and their air complements, I'm sure you could have 10 or more by that time.

So where's the Washington Treaty?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Naval_Treaty
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Boggit on June 21, 2016, 06:27:02 PM
Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake... but Halsey might have  ;)  (A cheap shot, admittedly. Halsey was a great commander.)
Halsey was right to argue against taking on Peleliu. Nimitz won the argument, but a lot of good men died. In terms of strategy Halsey was probably right in hindsight.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on June 21, 2016, 11:22:27 PM
Halsey was the right guy at the right time, but his track record as a commander (and his judgment in when he chose to display independence) seems very inconsistent to me.  His performance at Leyte Gulf was disgraceful and entirely consistent with a vainglorious fool, while his decisions to sail into the face of a storm turned out to be a pretty poor one.  Halsey seemed to measure upside much more effectively than to manage downside.

I have no idea if the game models this, but it took a lot of work to get carrier air group operations working smoothly--especially for the US Navy who hadn't been fighting for as long as the Japanese.  There's a reason why the Japanese air attacks at Midway arrived in two compact forces (one against Midway, the other against the Yorktown) from 4 carriers, while the American attacks on the Japanese carrier force arrived in something like 11 different installments.  Heck, the American carriers couldn't even get their own flights (e.g., dive bombers and torpedo bombers) to arrive together.

Parshall and Tully give a great account of carrier air group operations on both sides in Shattered Sword, for anybody who hasn't read anything about Midway in 20 years...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 21, 2016, 11:53:06 PM
Lost all 7 carriers?  Oh the humanity!

Seriously that is a huge bummer. I'm not sure I'd have the heart (ha) to carry on after such a catastrophe. Sign the instruments of surrender and start again.   8)

Nimitz wouldn't have made such a mistake... but Halsey might have  ;)  (A cheap shot, admittedly. Halsey was a great commander.)

@glen -- I wasn't marveling at the number of CVs so much as Ian's decision to park his task force right off the coast of Japan in 1942!  The man has balls.

Well, you see, the thing is . . . I don't know how it went in his game, but in mine the Japanese never came after Pearl.  In fact, they never invaded ANYWHERE where I had a garrison.

It's true that I drew my line in from the very beginning and tried to make a few strongpoints instead of defend the whole Pacific, and I built a lot of air and it was mostly for the Pacific, but still, they were disappointingly timid.  I withdrew all American forces from the Philippines in January '36 and I played up to late '42 and the Japanese still hadn't invaded the Phils!  They did at least take Java and Singapore and got the resources they had to have, but they were pretty much giving me a pass.  Leaving 'em alone until they get ready to squash you like a bug is not exactly the way for them to take on the Americans.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 22, 2016, 03:58:43 AM
I saw this on Reddit and found it helpful as a beginner to HOI overall.  I had played HOI3 a little but was completely overwhelmed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/paradoxplaza/comments/4ndo3r/over_200_tips_for_new_players/

Great tips. after reading this it's possible to set rally points for freshly deployed units:


How To have new units deploy to a custom rally point


1. Create or designate a non-combat group and select the Fallback Line tool.

(http://orig04.deviantart.net/92b3/f/2016/174/3/e/1_by_jack_o_tales-da7b4ia.jpg)




2. Draw the rally point line.

(http://orig05.deviantart.net/4213/f/2016/174/6/c/2_by_jack_o_tales-da7b4i4.jpg)




3. Open the Recruit & Deploy Screen and click on the grey circle here, then left click on your rally line:

(http://orig08.deviantart.net/21ae/f/2016/174/3/0/3_by_jack_o_tales-da7b4i0.jpg)




4. The circle turns brown. Those divisions will now deploy on map around the line.

(http://orig00.deviantart.net/ed1a/f/2016/174/0/3/4_by_jack_o_tales-da7b4hw.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 22, 2016, 04:29:01 AM
NOTE: If you are using the AI Research Vision Tweaks mod from steam, it is bugged on the Weserubung National Focus Event for Germany (gain cores on Denmark Norway for invasion).

The bug is that for the event to be met, France must not control Brittany. This is obviously very wrong.

I've reported it to the modder (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=704100462) but for those of you who know how (I take no responsibility if you screw up and are doing this for the first time), here is the correct code:

Code: [Select]
focus = {
id = GER_weserubung
icon = GFX_goal_generic_more_territorial_claims
prerequisite = { focus = GER_danzig_or_war }
mutually_exclusive = { focus = GER_denmark_friend }
will_lead_to_war_with = DEN
will_lead_to_war_with = NOR
bypass = {
AND = {
OR = {
DEN = {
is_in_faction_with = GER
NOT = { country_exists = DEN }
}
}
}
}


available = {
POL = {
NOT = { controls_state = 85 }
NOT = { controls_state = 10 }
}
OR = {
has_war_with = ENG
NOT = {country_exists = ENG}
}
}
x = 17
y = 7
cost = 10
ai_will_do = {
factor = 10
modifier = {
factor = 0
date < 1939.1.1
}
}
completion_reward = {

if = {
limit = {
NOT = { DEN = { is_in_faction_with = GER } }
country_exists = DEN
}
create_wargoal = {
type = take_state_focus
target = DEN
generator = { 37 }
}
}


if = {
limit = {
NOT = { NOR = { is_in_faction_with = GER } }
country_exists = NOR
}
create_wargoal = {
type = take_state_focus
target = NOR
generator = { 110 }
}
}

add_tech_bonus = {
name = tp_bonus
bonus = 0.5
ahead_reduction = 1
uses = 1
technology = transport
technology = landing_craft
technology = tank_landing_craft
}
hidden_effect = {
news_event = { hours = 6 id = news.233 }
}
}
}



You have to hit two locations:

x86\Steam\steamapps\workshop\content\394360\704100462\ai_research_division_tweaks\common\national_focus\Germany.txt

and

Documents\Paradox Interactive\Hearts of Iron IV\workshop\content\394360\704100462\common\national_focus\Germany.txt

search for 'Weser' and it will take you to the header of the code entry.


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 22, 2016, 05:20:58 AM
Ah Germany Capitulates and Japan turns communist (still at war with them though).  This is Feb 1942.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 22, 2016, 05:22:24 AM


Great tips. after reading this it's possible to set rally points for freshly deployed units:


How To have new units deploy to a custom rally point

1. Create or designate a non-combat group and select the Fallback Line tool.

I use the garrison command for this purpose and that works just as well.  As a bonus the garrison units
will react if there are invasions in their designated area(s) (I usually put them in coastal areas)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 22, 2016, 06:15:48 AM
Ha!  World War 2 ends in 1942 with the defeat of the Axis.  Germany, Italy, Japan, and other minor countries capitulated. 
Japan ends up surviving with no loss in territory despite the Allies and Communist China (Me) ravaging Japan.
Germany becomes a Socialist state.
Italy mainly intact but lose some provinces.  I get some former Italian provinces in the Adriatic, Arabian Peninsula, and Corsica (actually stupid but I had no other option as these are the provinces I can claim based on my war score).

I think it's now the cold war or WW2 dedux.  I can go on an plot to battle Japan again or take out Nationalist China once and for all.
(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/261588346131801400/2A1DFAA043EF2394BCA1AC8C80671AD4FEB434F4/)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 22, 2016, 02:23:37 PM
Anyone else find it strange that RPS *still* hasn't reviewed HOI4?

(I know RPS isn't universally beloved around here -- but it's a site I generally enjoy. I find the complete radio silence on HOI4 baffling...)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 22, 2016, 02:53:38 PM
Anyone else find it strange that RPS *still* hasn't reviewed HOI4?

(I know RPS isn't universally beloved around here -- but it's a site I generally enjoy. I find the complete radio silence on HOI4 baffling...)

Nobody at RPS has a fucking clue how to play this kind of game.  Frankly I'm grateful that they've ignored it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 22, 2016, 02:56:51 PM
One of the longer running games I had as the UK.  Belgian troops march into Berlin in 43 after more than 150 Divisions of my Brits secure Africa and Italy.

(http://i331.photobucket.com/albums/l472/AndrewDupy/20160622154129_1_zpsxs2cml4t.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 22, 2016, 02:59:17 PM
I'd like to discuss deeper aspects of the game in specific areas but don't want to do it on the official forum and if I do it on this thread it will get endlessly off-topic. Are there any intelligent non threadlocking user-friendly forums for HOI elsewhere?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 22, 2016, 03:02:53 PM
I'd like to discuss deeper aspects of the game in specific areas but don't want to do it on the official forum and if I do it on this thread it will get endlessly off-topic. Are there any intelligent non threadlocking user-friendly forums for HOI elsewhere?

If it's about the game, this would seem like an ideal place...?  If you really want to go elsewhere though, try /r/paradoxplaza on Reddit.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: CptHowdy on June 22, 2016, 03:05:39 PM
I'd like to discuss deeper aspects of the game in specific areas but don't want to do it on the official forum and if I do it on this thread it will get endlessly off-topic. Are there any intelligent non threadlocking user-friendly forums for HOI elsewhere?

give us some credit! i think you can discuss things here. this topic is very general though. not sure how the mods would react if you made a thread discussing a specific aspect such as military, economy, research etc...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on June 22, 2016, 03:34:15 PM
This thread's had enough legs, try starting a separate, more focused thread on this forum and see if it has legs!  That's my vote, anyways...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 22, 2016, 03:35:12 PM
I'd like to discuss deeper aspects of the game in specific areas but don't want to do it on the official forum and if I do it on this thread it will get endlessly off-topic. Are there any intelligent non threadlocking user-friendly forums for HOI elsewhere?

give us some credit! i think you can discuss things here. this topic is very general though. not sure how the mods would react if you made a thread discussing a specific aspect such as military, economy, research etc...

Definitely keep the conversations here at Grogheads. Its ok to create other threads. We won't mod them. If there are enough threads and enough interest, we could create a subforum for the game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 22, 2016, 03:50:42 PM
Anyone else find it strange that RPS *still* hasn't reviewed HOI4?

(I know RPS isn't universally beloved around here -- but it's a site I generally enjoy. I find the complete radio silence on HOI4 baffling...)

Nobody at RPS has a fucking clue how to play this kind of game.  Frankly I'm grateful that they've ignored it.

Tim Stone?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Huw the Poo on June 22, 2016, 04:12:18 PM
Nobody at RPS has a fucking clue how to play this kind of game.  Frankly I'm grateful that they've ignored it.

Tim Stone?

I was more referring to John Walker's recent coverage of Stellaris.  Does Tim still write for RPS?  Fair enough - why didn't he review Stellaris then?  Why hasn't he reviewed HoI4?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 22, 2016, 04:38:36 PM
Every time I play this game I learn literally an ecyclopedia of new things.

Played Italy trying to go Fascist but befriending everyone to try and stay out of the war while building infrastructure.  My goal was to let Britain and France slog it out with the German and then swoop in to take over the exhausted combatants on both sides.  Of course what happened was radically different.  I didnt enter combat until 1944 by which point Britains armies were massive had invaded Germany and taken Berlin, the US entered the war and reinforced the Suez canal, France took over Spain choking off the Med and my 2000 fighters were swatted out of the sky by a combined force of 5K plus allied onslaught.  So being passive only gets you put over the barrel at a later date.  However I watched a lot more videos and learn so much more each time that the lack of an ecylopedic manual for this game is a criminal offense.

Also I would like to see something more interactive than videos.  In this day it should be possible to have a game file from a knowledgeable player that we can download and play on our computers ourselves.  They could put tool tips on where major decisions were taken an audio track of the players thoughts and strategies.  If this was playable you could stop it at some point and play onward from that position, check out what other events are happening under the hood for supply/production etc. and be able to use the interface!  Watching videos is only superficially helpful in that you are not interacting with the game.  I just found out how to properly adjust battle plans and how to set up fleet engagements after watch hours of videos.  A playable game file with explanatory tool tips would have solved that issue for me long ago.

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 22, 2016, 06:07:13 PM
Every time I play this game I learn literally an ecyclopedia of new things.

Played Italy trying to go Fascist but befriending everyone to try and stay out of the war while building infrastructure.  My goal was to let Britain and France slog it out with the German and then swoop in to take over the exhausted combatants on both sides.  Of course what happened was radically different.  I didnt enter combat until 1944 by which point Britains armies were massive had invaded Germany and taken Berlin, the US entered the war and reinforced the Suez canal, France took over Spain choking off the Med and my 2000 fighters were swatted out of the sky by a combined force of 5K plus allied onslaught.  So being passive only gets you put over the barrel at a later date.  However I watched a lot more videos and learn so much more each time that the lack of an ecylopedic manual for this game is a criminal offense.

Also I would like to see something more interactive than videos.  In this day it should be possible to have a game file from a knowledgeable player that we can download and play on our computers ourselves.  They could put tool tips on where major decisions were taken an audio track of the players thoughts and strategies.  If this was playable you could stop it at some point and play onward from that position, check out what other events are happening under the hood for supply/production etc. and be able to use the interface!  Watching videos is only superficially helpful in that you are not interacting with the game.  I just found out how to properly adjust battle plans and how to set up fleet engagements after watch hours of videos.  A playable game file with explanatory tool tips would have solved that issue for me long ago.

Con

It is certainly a lot of work to figure out how to play this game, and I am not sure that the state of the AI justifies it.

There is a lot to love about this game, though a lot of good broken ground.  I've never seen anything like the way divisions are produced, and the Battle Planner is a sweet, sweet idea that actually works pretty doggoned well (absent a couple of little problems that can easily be earned out. I hope Paradox gives the AI the same kind of TLC it gave to the AI in EU 4.  This could be a real breakthrough game for this series.  Warts and all, I have already played it as much as probably any HOI game.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 22, 2016, 08:55:19 PM
I'm now in a stupid situation.  My main army is in Japan but we are not at peace.  Since I lost control of coastal provinces and naval assets due to the peace treaty, I can't bring them home.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 22, 2016, 09:01:39 PM
I'm now in a stupid situation.  My main army is in Japan but we are not at peace.  Since I lost control of coastal provinces and naval assets due to the peace treaty, I can't bring them home.

Sounds like the same bug they had in Stellaris. I'm sure it's on the top of the patch list.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 22, 2016, 09:24:14 PM
The more and more I read here and other forums I think I'll just stick to playing minor nations to get more experience playing this game and wait to play the majors when a few patches come out.

But HOT DAMN....I wants me some Essex carriers!!  :smitten:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 22, 2016, 10:02:06 PM
I disbanded the guys in Japan.  After sometime, went to war with Nationalist China.  Then they joined Allies.  So it's a full blown Allies vs. Comintern World War raging around the Balkans and China.
Have to admit, game is fun despite the freaky results.

And how do I disable the window with the dog?   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 23, 2016, 02:12:41 AM
And how do I disable the window with the dog?

  ????
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 23, 2016, 03:53:54 AM

give us some credit! i think you can discuss things here.

I know, but I meant for example, that I wanted to discuss the effectiveness of subs and ASW early in the game and whether DD's are a bit over-powered too early on. That sort of thing tends to go into specifics and get lost in a general thread. However, creating that topic in a general computer game forum is pretty specific.



Definitely keep the conversations here at Grogheads. Its ok to create other threads. We won't mod them. If there are enough threads and enough interest, we could create a subforum for the game.

Thanks Jarhead. Starting new thread.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 23, 2016, 07:50:55 AM
Appreciate everything your contributing to the HoI 4 communication here Ian. It's helping this noobie out immensely.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 23, 2016, 07:57:33 AM
So, my current game I'm playing as Japan and going after the Bear. My plan so far is to take as much of lower Asia as I can and declare on Russia once Germany goes after them.

I am trying to avoid a war with the us.

Let's see if I can pull this off. Currently in 39 and Europe is starting to heat up. Main issues for me are production and air power, which is bad since it's so OP right now.

Made some mistakes already here and there but this is my first game after the tutorial so I'm letting it ride.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 23, 2016, 11:44:45 AM
New Beta patch is up:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-1-1-0-beta-patch.951818/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 23, 2016, 02:08:53 PM
Appreciate everything your contributing to the HoI 4 communication here Ian. It's helping this noobie out immensely.

You're welcome. I have a lot of spare time right now and I like to pursue my interests 8)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 23, 2016, 02:13:09 PM
New Beta patch is up:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-1-1-0-beta-patch.951818/

Why beta patch and should you download it:
This patch might contain new errors. QA has not had a lot of time to test everything like we normally would, and some of the hardware related issues is stuff that is just much easier to have the people experiencing problems check themselves.
So, if you know how to use beta patches and dare to live a little dangerously (I wouldnt attempt ironman on this build tbh in case it ruins your save), and would love to help then check this out. I am not going to promote this patch outside the forum because, well, its beta and not fully supported. If you run into problems, just roll back to default version.




Features
- It is now possible to set a command group to execute orders in different manners: carefully, balanced, and rush.
- Added achievements indicator in game setup telling you if you can get achievements or not
- Now possible to start from scratch with an empty division template by selecting New in the designer drop down]

UI
- Division designer difference indicators now have tooltips showing how much
- Added open air base button to the air mission entry
- Now shift+click on the category in the production will make visible only that category
- Interface tweaks so long texts in other languages does fit in several places
- Added buttons for airwing limit to make easier to adjust values in big steps
- Now navy commander can now also be assigned while fleet is not in the port
- Added tooltip and toggling icon to indicate if current settings let you unlock achievements
- You can now merge fleets that are not in the same location, the merging fleet will then travel to its merge target and then merge with it.
- Now it is possible to assign airplanes to a mission area before the arrive to the new base
- Division template window has now better tooltips for equipment, manpower, training time.
- Clarified "no trading while fighting"-tooltip
- Added yellow highlight to deployment date for units
- Changed string format for convoys in topbar to prevent overflow
- Opinion in interface will now also return a value capped between min and max values
- removed useless decimals in logistics screen
- Logistics screen now show 1 decimal when over 1k

Bugfixes
- Fixed issue when sometimes frontlines was not updated after occupation.
- Now Nation A liberates Nation B if Nation B is friend or giving military access to Nation A, otherwise occupies
- Fixing quiting to menu achivement bug
- Fixed some focus that couldnt be aborted
- Fixed issue where it was impossible to do naval transfers where you have the theatres. Also player couldn't RMB on some naval ports but the systems allowed for the transportation (GUI issue).
- Building cosntruction triggers checked for owned state/province. Now checks for controlled instead
- Added on_action to the add_to_faction effect which should fix lack of achivements for faction joining
- Modified flags for Holland
- Fixed so equipment cost list doesnīt cut of 11th entry in div designer
- Efficiency retention techs now actually help (no efficiency loss at max all techs now!)
- Fixed spelling error in FRA, BRAZ for "Ottowa"-class ship
- Intel overview of nation now also lists airplanes in stockpile
- The political advisor type "Ideological Crusader", which are supposed to increase same ideology opinion with 20%, now has an effect.
- Added custom trigger description depending on type of idea for better tooltips
- Border occupation now account situations when you attack trough the country which is from the same war, but not in the same faction, plus border flip afterwards also account for countries from the same war.
- The game option "Pause on Notifications" now also pauses NF/research.
- Proper data cleanup when kicked, banned, connection lost, server lost.
- Fixed glitch in the front sections calculations, causing sometimes the fronts to be split/malformed.
- Skybox is no longer visible when you toggle UI off
- Changed font on animated map text so it show cryllic and polish characters
- Fixed fighter icon for polish dlc
- Fixed text on Mod tools button in launcher that didn't fit in Spanish
- Kick and ban buttons in mp lobby should now be aligned (important!)
- Maldives now looks a tad better, changed the heightmap, made some of the islands smaller and nudged unit positions
- Fixed script error in Pearl Harbor Gambit focus
- Carrier deck size now matches everywhere.
- No longer allowed to declare war on someone you are fighting a war together with.
- Convoy count in topbar now can show 5 digits
- Fixed Issue where long air region names goes out of dedicated area
- Added triggers to block multiple news event options
- Fixed issue when take all states action did not changed the price when other country puppet the loser
- Drawing offensive orders now takes better choice which def.line to attach the arrow to.
- Added ability to disable debug saves and made them turned off as default
- Added bypass to Pearl Harbor gambit focus for USA
- Fixed malformed frontlines against master/puppet for countries being in faction with the master.
- Disabled the system_debug.log when not running with "-debug" launch option.
- Fixed pausing of the game on the fullscreen
- Patched mysterious issue when airbase was lost and the air wings still remained in void space. Now they are send back to the warehouse.
- Fix for flickering airbase icon in the airbase view
- Nations who are done in a peace deal will no longer give remaining points to anyone in faction, just people with same ideology
- Parts of unit map icons will no longer "trap" the zoom-in with mouse
- Fixed artillery starting with 0 defense
- Now peaceconference saves will happen only with -debug while start up
- Now occupation breakdown updates properly after exiting to main menu
- Fixed occupation rules
- Fixed a bug where you could avoid civil war by inviting back trotsky
- Warscore from bombing is now saved in save game.
- Warscore from bombing is now much lower + added monthly falloff.
- Fixed issues with country rules not clearing properly and not updating every day
- Added special case for showing shortcut icons "," and "."
- Changed price calculation for new divisions so now it does not add up cost for group if it is first group
- Increased modifier that prevents spain from joining axis early
- Fixed bug where a country without the rule of occupying neutral countries could occupy them.
- Fixed the bug when airings manpower was not updated
- King G now only dies once
- Browser now remembers last page
- Naval strikes can now also hit navally transfered troops outside combats
- Added event that allows merges of 2 communist chinas
- Fix for peace conference turns not taking scor einto consideration properly
- Fixed bug where it was possible to send a single unit as exp.force twice!
- Changed a lot of popus to use the definite article
- Fixed a bug that gave USA extra PP for certain NF
- Warscore is no longer added from dropped countries in war merging.
- Trade routes over land now get correct tooltip on day 1


AI
- Tweaked deployment AI to not get crippled when their armies are taking damage.
- Air mission AI is better at prioritizing the most important regions in stead of getting stuck in local optima of groups of regions.
- Tweaked down AI desire for motorized a bit.
- Added scriptable AI strategy to tweak factory assignment to equipment types and SIGNIFICANTLY boosted fighter production.
- Tweaked up AI production balance for infantry equipment.
- Tweaked guarantee desire to go down the more enemies a country has. Should keep Allies from going guarantee crazy while in wars.
- Added a define for min steps for unit controller to strategically redeploy to front location and boosted it from 4 to 8 to reduce lots of small redeployments along fronts.
- Made AI capable of determining if a template was created by them or not. Germany should no longer replace their divisions with templates from Austria.
- Tweaked area defense and pocket handling AI to be better at handling coastal defense.
- Tied countries naval base IC fraction to their naval AI focus, primarily meaning Germany will not be building as many of them, at least initially.
- Improved unitcontrollers capability to recognize when units should join as support in a combat (effects both player and AI).
- The AI now launches naval invasions against the same enemy area at the same time rather than separately.
- Tweaked AI template designing
- Having a common enemy will now make AI very accepting to granting and accepting military access as long as both are democracies.
- Neutral countries now consider guarantees when deciding on which faction it would rather join.
- AI is now properly checking if having common enemy when looking at asking for and granting military access, and is also more eager to do
- Soviet and Germany should no longer bail from the Unholy alliance as soon as they can
- AI containment score no longer goes massively negative if a major is farther away than germany meaning Allies can guarantee vs soviet aggression if they are worse than Germany
- Made non-core states count as half compared to core states when deciding on number of units for area defense.
- Added Women in Aviation to historical focus list for soviet
- Moved Claims in Baltic up the historical focus list for soviet
- Improved AI naval deployment to strategic regions
- Tweaked front assignment AI. Should mean AI is better at multi front wars.
- Further tweaks to AI front assignment to attempt to reduce bad stuff happening in multi front wars.
- Further tweaked the AI front balancing, and made sure France does not completely mess up their Italian front and Germany pushes hard against Poland when war breaks out
- AI should now be able to respond to naval invasions with naval bombers
- Made sure fascist majors are much more likely to go for war economy
- Polish AI will no longer randomly change its ideology by picking ministers
- AI should no longer use garrison divisions as infantry.
- Changed trigger condition for UK focus Benelux Intervention to require a bit more fascist/communist support, preventing the AI from taking it immediately.
- Naval AI will now deploy all its fleets (previously it would generally deploy less than 1/3 of all its ships). AI will now split fleets it cannot find a mission for, allowing it to spread them out better
- AI is now able to set naval bombers to try to prevent others from sending reinforcements over water.
- Tweaked AI down prio of non war/dangerous fronts.
- AI will no longer guarantee against leaders of other naughty factions (like soviet) if there is a much much worse faction around doing bad stuff (Axis)
- AI nations will no longer spam you with requests for military access at game start and nations who would rather occupy someone than liberate wont ask for military access
- AI can now feed puppets/liberated/change government countries with states in peace conferences giving much saner outcomes
- Made sure unitcontroller does not interfere with retreating units.


Database & Balance
- Changed German democratic party to Zentrum
- NF completion for Poland 39 start
- Fixed spanish communist crusader using male portrait
- Focus Lessons of War and Sov-Ger research agreement now give less armor research
- Added AFG leader portrait Zahir Shah, VEN leader portrait Lopez Contreras and 3 new middle eastern generic portraits
- Replaced incorrect japanese general
- Added Xi'an to PRC
- Added straits to denmark to make them more surrendermonkeys [Balance]
- Several name corrections in OOB files
- Province 3860 is now a part of state 527 instead of 328. (Manchuria/Korea)
- Added an event to move PRC capital to Beijing or Nanjing after Chinese Civil War.
- Added a requirement of more than 15% world tension to War Economy policy.
- Removed Hungarian claims from Northern Transylvania and Vojvodina
- Removed generic Tank Designer idea from Canada.
- Moved Sao Paulo to be part of the Sao Paulo state.
- Found a better Serbian fascist party leader.
- Adjustment to Paraguay and Nicaraguan political 36 and 39 starts.
- Republican Spain and Nationalist Spain now have the same National Unity
- Added more ai_choice triggers for Czechoslovakia's response to German demands.
- Added localisation for Libyan adjectives
- Changed names for neutral Nicaragua and Paraguay
- Fixed Finland starting as democratic in 1939
- Added ENG cores to French cores when Anglo-French Union happens
- If the Munich agreement can't happen (depending on various wars for GER or CZE) CZE will now get a different event about ceding the Sudetenland or giving GER a wargoal.
- Soviet now gets one armor research bonus and one land doctrine, rather than three armor research.
- Fate of Czechoslovakia now correctly adds claims and an annex CB if CZE resists GER.
- Fixed text overflow in Balearic Islands headline.
- Expanded the final event for RAJ's Azad Hind, and added several removal points for the Azad Hind idea.
- Removed eng core from state 687-British Guyana
- Added fixedsize to countrystate view state owner and foreign claims
- Fixed heightmap error on denmark
- Fixed so all building in the maldives are on land again
- German march order music now has correct path
- State name corrections.
- Added names for (unreleased) country tags.
- Lowered time for Demand Balearic islands for Italy
- Moved capital of Brazil to Rio
- Subdue the Warlords now requires that China does not exist or is a puppet of Japan
- Johnson Island Garrison renamed to Johnston Island Garrison
- Corrected JAP_1939 unit history.
- Fixed a bug where an achievement wouldn't fire because of it was using any_country trigger
- Soviet foci New Soviet Man and Women in Aviation have switched places
- Added general to Ireland
- Nerfed skill 5 generals for BRA AST AFG CAN
- Changed German Admirals traits for variety
- Bumped population of some of the smaller islands
- Changed ideology of country leader for DEN FIN FRA NOR SWE
- Changed start trade to use factories instead of specific amount of factories for trade
- Increased air range on rocket interceptors now that local coverage isnt always 100%
- Mass assault doctrine now gets -10% lower requirement on training for deploying divisions
- Political parties and leaders for Brazil. From forum.
- Great depression now limits faction joining at an extra 20%
- Human pause now has a superior priority to the automatic pause
- Fixed issue with fleet splitting failing because it forgot to assign base
- Now state controller switches properly after capitulation
- Added 3 new generic asian stateleader portraits and 2 new generic asian warlord portraits
- Added 6 new generic Arabian portraits
- Sheng Shicai got a minor facelift
- USA now gets a slightly different shade of blue to differentiate them from france
- Fixed inconsistent finnish flags
- Added additional flags for Jordan

Stability & Performance
- Will no longer overwrite ironman saves if writing of current failed
- Optimizations for air interface and mapmode
- Parser now handles large tokens without crashing on savegame load
- Optimization for releasing countries
- Fixed several memory leaks
- Fixed CTD for airwing transfer when base in invalid
- Fix for potential CTD in splitting navy when you have no home base.
- Fixed rare ctd when loading an old savegame from ingame with active naval combats
- Fixed several rare CTDs

User Modding
- Added possibility to script in historical aces in name pools
- Moved dynamic country tags into a separate file
- Manpower in field trigger no longer counts expeditionary forces from other nations
- Fixed issues with tooltip for ships in port trigger
- Added defines to tweak unit assignment importance for different kinds of orders.
- Added possibility to script desired amount of factories to spend on a trade
- Fixed crash from default bookmark being later than 1936
- Added add_ai_strategy effect
- In debug mode the country flag tooltip will now show AI strategy values
- Fixed map icon crash from having more than 128 country capitals in view

Multiplayer
- Supplysystem should now update for all players when changing country controller (OOS fix)
- Observers no longer get asked for co-op acces as well as main player


So how do I get this?

1. In steam right click the game in the list of games and pick Properties
2. Go to the Betas tab
3. in the drop-down select 1.1.0_beta (if it doesnt appear you might have to restart steam)
4. Close Properties. Steam should now queue up an update and will display the game in the list as Hearts of Iron IV [1.1.0_beta]
5. if all went well the last bit of the version number in launcher should display "(c285)" which should be the correct checksum
6. Once we go official you can just remove the beta branch and go back to main by doing this again and selecting NONE.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 23, 2016, 08:03:35 PM
So here I was trying to conquer  Sinkiang...and I didn't realize that a country can join a faction after it is at war.

They declared to Comintern...and that was that...I was not ready to poke the Bear at that point and they marched right through me.

ON to the next game with lessons learned.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 23, 2016, 08:11:42 PM
So here I was trying to conquer  Sinkiang...and I didn't realize that a country can join a faction after it is at war.

They declared to Comintern...and that was that...I was not ready to poke the Bear at that point and they marched right through me.

ON to the next game with lessons learned.

Yeah Nationalist China did that on me.  Joined Allies (as stated above).  Now our local war is now part of the world war.  And we (Comintern) are losing against the Free World.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 23, 2016, 08:32:10 PM
Trying to play as Italy my earlier failures where getting swatted out of the sky by thousands of allied planes.  Now I am trying to focus on air superiority and am trying to determine the following

1. Go for 1940 fighters onlyas soon as possible
2. Go for a mix of some early heavy fighters and hordes of 1940 fighters
3. Double down and focus on getting 1940 heavy fighters and 1940 fighters and just build these

What do people prefer to try and win the air wars?

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 23, 2016, 09:02:48 PM
Just wondering how you all are setting up your divisions?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 23, 2016, 09:17:40 PM
So my country has capitulated to Nationalist China.  But the war is still on.  Watching Soviet Union fight off the rest of the world.
The funny thing is, I can still play.  My guys are still making research breakthroughs (Nuclear).  And I was able to assign my fighters to Moscow to help the Soviets.
I'm even still plotting coups on Nationalist China.  Who knows?  I may still regain my country after the Peace talks.  Then I'll blow up everyone with nukes.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 24, 2016, 06:49:19 AM
Regarding the new patch, I particularly welcome these changes:


You now need to give someone military access to walk through your land. there is no auto access for having same enemy (so no soviets in allied territory)


It is now possible to set a command group to execute orders in different manners: carefully, balanced, and rush.

Now possible to start from scratch with an empty division template by selecting New in the designer drop down

Now shift+click on the category in the production will make visible only that category

Added buttons for airwing limit to make easier to adjust values in big steps

Now navy commander can now also be assigned while fleet is not in the port

You can now merge fleets that are not in the same location, the merging fleet will then travel to its merge target and then merge with it.

Now it is possible to assign airplanes to a mission area before the arrive to the new base

Added scriptable AI strategy to tweak factory assignment to equipment types and SIGNIFICANTLY boosted fighter production.

Made AI capable of determining if a template was created by them or not. Germany should no longer replace their divisions with templates from Austria.

Tweaked area defense and pocket handling AI to be better at handling coastal defense.

The AI now launches naval invasions against the same enemy area at the same time rather than separately.

Improved AI naval deployment to strategic regions

AI is better at multi front wars

Naval strikes can now also hit navally transfered troops outside combats

AI should now be able to respond to naval invasions with naval bombers

AI is now able to set naval bombers to try to prevent others from sending reinforcements over water.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 24, 2016, 07:05:03 AM
Hmm patch will probably go live next week. Torn between starting new game or going back to Stellaris for a bit.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 24, 2016, 01:40:30 PM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 24, 2016, 02:51:11 PM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks


This might be what you're looking for:

http://niehorster.org/000_admin/000oob.htm

examples:

USA
http://niehorster.org/013_usa/_41_usarmy/_41_us-army.htm

UK
http://niehorster.org/017_britain/__uk.htm

France
http://niehorster.org/020_france/__france.htm

Germany
http://niehorster.org/011_germany/__ge_index.htm

Italy
http://niehorster.org/019_italy/__italy.htm

Japan
http://niehorster.org/014_japan/__ighq.htm

USSR
http://niehorster.org/012_ussr/__stavka.htm


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on June 24, 2016, 02:56:18 PM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks

Also you can watch this guy on you tube, very informative about historical divisional layouts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyQmhrVKsc0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 24, 2016, 03:07:00 PM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks


This might be what you're looking for:

http://niehorster.org/000_admin/000oob.htm

examples:

USA
http://niehorster.org/013_usa/_41_usarmy/_41_us-army.htm

UK
http://niehorster.org/017_britain/__uk.htm

France
http://niehorster.org/020_france/__france.htm

Germany
http://niehorster.org/011_germany/__ge_index.htm

Italy
http://niehorster.org/019_italy/__italy.htm

Japan
http://niehorster.org/014_japan/__ighq.htm

USSR
http://niehorster.org/012_ussr/__stavka.htm

Wow. Those links give me serious wood.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 24, 2016, 03:12:22 PM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks


This might be what you're looking for:

http://niehorster.org/000_admin/000oob.htm

examples:

USA
http://niehorster.org/013_usa/_41_usarmy/_41_us-army.htm

UK
http://niehorster.org/017_britain/__uk.htm

France
http://niehorster.org/020_france/__france.htm

Germany
http://niehorster.org/011_germany/__ge_index.htm

Italy
http://niehorster.org/019_italy/__italy.htm

Japan
http://niehorster.org/014_japan/__ighq.htm

USSR
http://niehorster.org/012_ussr/__stavka.htm

Wow. Those links give me serious wood.

 :o

I'll never be able to look at an OoB the same again
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 24, 2016, 03:12:46 PM
*bookmarked*

Thanks for posting, Ian
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 24, 2016, 03:54:39 PM

Wow. Those links give me serious wood.

They are excellent. I found this waaaay back in the early 2000's. I think *every* NATO symbol is clickable.
Thanks everyone, glad to help.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on June 25, 2016, 05:37:54 AM
Can any recommend a site that can help with OoB's/division structure for the major powers?

I want to mess around with the Division Designer this weekend and my knowledge of OoB's is weak, at best.

Thanks


This might be what you're looking for:

http://niehorster.org/000_admin/000oob.htm

examples:

USA
http://niehorster.org/013_usa/_41_usarmy/_41_us-army.htm

UK
http://niehorster.org/017_britain/__uk.htm

France
http://niehorster.org/020_france/__france.htm

Germany
http://niehorster.org/011_germany/__ge_index.htm

Italy
http://niehorster.org/019_italy/__italy.htm

Japan
http://niehorster.org/014_japan/__ighq.htm

USSR
http://niehorster.org/012_ussr/__stavka.htm

Wow. Those links give me serious wood.

(https://gbatemp.net/attachments/apparently-_ac6de7c283dd992580a83834757064d2-gif.3668/)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 25, 2016, 09:08:58 AM
(http://orig15.deviantart.net/69b9/f/2016/177/7/f/jellybaby_685_by_jack_o_tales-da7p91p.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 25, 2016, 09:46:03 AM
Any thoughts on the new beta ?   Paradox forums mention it contains bugs, but that is the paradox forum ...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 25, 2016, 10:44:03 AM
Any thoughts on the new beta ?   Paradox forums mention it contains bugs, but that is the paradox forum ...

It probably does have bugs, but it's fixed the worst in my opinion. My naval bombers and CAS now hit naval transports and the hideous military access bug is gone.
The Paradox Forums for HOI are generally not a place of rational, reasoned communication.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 25, 2016, 02:42:55 PM
Any thoughts on the new beta ?   Paradox forums mention it contains bugs, but that is the paradox forum ...

It probably does have bugs, but it's fixed the worst in my opinion. My naval bombers and CAS now hit naval transports and the hideous military access bug is gone.
The Paradox Forums for HOI are generally not a place of rational, reasoned communication.

Those forums are damn near as toxic as the Steam forums.....ok, maybe not that bad
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 25, 2016, 06:31:13 PM
Any thoughts on the new beta ?   Paradox forums mention it contains bugs, but that is the paradox forum ...

Well, the Chinese managed to actually drive me out of China in my first Japan game on the new patch. 

The aggressive execute plan on the battle planner helps, but it's still a lot less intelligent and more passive than the player.  But it's a major improvement over what was there before, absolute step in the right direction. 

On defense, the AI has, at least in China, held a front better, and it actually was very very savvy on realizing when I, as Japan, had reached supply overload.  It counterattacked right at the worst moment, and yeah, I had to actually withdraw from Northern China lest I lose my army.   Never had to do that in any past HoI game, so kudos on that. 

Also, far less strategic redeployment by the AI along fronts.  This was a huge problem. 

So far no bugs except for one startup crash.  Beta seems stable and very playable.  It's not perfect, but an improvement.  Looking forward to more steps in the right direction. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 25, 2016, 06:32:51 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 25, 2016, 06:40:14 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.

Same here JH. I've let go trying to play any major nation until I get a better grasp of things.

Enjoying a Romanian game right now  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 25, 2016, 06:41:33 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.

Indeed.  This is where the battle planner should come in and help you a bit.  It didn't pre 1.1, but it seems better at doing it now. 

For air and sea though, you've just got to hope things are handling themselves.  The popups on the right side are easy to miss and the AI is a lot quicker at redeploying and concentrating its air power than I am.

For fleets, right now, just go stack of doom.  Putting the most ships possible under one fleet seems to trump everything else.   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 26, 2016, 12:26:04 AM
And, after playing a while into 1940 as Japan, there are still very very messed up things in the 1.1 Patch.

Front priority is still, very badly messed up as the Axis.  Germany keeps over 80 divisions on the Soviet Border after taking Poland, leading to them being unable to make a dent in France. 

The UK still benefits from division spam and can put more than 100 divisions in the field by war's start, backed up by 5000+ fighters. 

AI Naval invasions are still very much ill advised and over aggressive, leading to the UK taking Rome in late '39 and then sitting there.

Ethiopia is still the primary battleground of early WW2, with Italy, the UK and Germany transferring most of their forces there to make the sands of Africa the deciding factor in the western war.

At least this time I'm over in Asia just watching and building my navy.  I'm wiping my hands of all these loons.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 26, 2016, 06:11:46 AM
My last game as Germany was very enjoyable, but also very frustrating, as well, due to all of the irregularities, both AI and historical.

I was able to keep the global hostility level under 50% through 1941 and stay out of a direct war with the allies, or the soviets. Meanwhile, I was able to expand significantly through national goals, rather than through outright conquest. However, as I was planning to invade Poland and France through the Netherlands/Belgium corridor, I noticed that Italy, my ally, was in a war with France and the U.K., and it was losing badly. I was annoyed that my ally was at war and I had received no obvious notification of this, no request for intervention or aide of any kind, and no justification for war against either the uk or France. Before I knew it, Rome fell and although Italy continued the fight, it was slowly being pushed off of the italian peninsula. Now my entire southern flank was exposed. Making matters worse, Italy declares war on Greece, despite the fact that it's homeland is being overrun.

Eventually, Poland, Netherlands and Belgium all capitulate. My divisions are victorious, and I am preparing to move toward Paris. After I invaded the Netherlands, however, the stage was set for the massive confusion I was talking about in my above post. Now, the entire world is at war. US divisions start to appear in my conquered territories, causing me to have to break off significant forces to stop them. Although I'm making steady progress through northern France, British and French divisions are tearing through my unprotected southern flank. By this time I'm virtually out of aircraft reserves and I have lost the ability to control the air and naval wars since I'm so totally stretched over everything that is happening on the ground.

I think there is still a chance to turn things around, but I'm not sure I will continue with this game since the situation is so chaotic.

So the things that really bothered me....

1. The lack of notification that Italy was in a war with France and the U.K. And the inability for me to intervene because I had no justification for war.

2. Italy's decision to invade Greece while it was losing a war in Italy.

3. The ease with which US divisions were able to move into Europe and gain a significant foothold.

4. The stiff rules associated with war declarations. It took a long time for me to be able to invade the Netherlands and Poland through the diplomatic justification for war requirement.

5. The difficulty in getting information on the progress of air and naval operations.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 26, 2016, 07:27:13 AM

5. The difficulty in getting information on the progress of air and naval operations.

This is typical Paradox. It's like they almost have a fetish for burying info under minute check buttons and arcane methods (mousing over a bar under the airfield graphic on the air screen, you thought was just a bar).


On a different note: speaking of arcane, this is pretty eccentric

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 26, 2016, 09:27:55 AM
"This is typical Paradox. It's like they almost have a fetish for burying info under minute check buttons and arcane methods (mousing over a bar under the airfield graphic on the air screen, you thought was just a bar)."

If that is a fetish, then Gary Grigsby has a raving psychosis...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 26, 2016, 12:48:38 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.

I played it like a turn-based game and paused every morning at 1 a.m. to give everything a once-over.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 26, 2016, 01:52:30 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.

It is. I'm convinced that this game cannot and should not be played during war time at more than speed 2. I also sometimes find myself becoming fixated on one particular operation/battle and losing sight elsewhere.

If anyone has missing this, you can 'pin' a location to the gui. click on an area and on the right, the grey location box appears. Click on the button to pin it. Very useful for going straight to key areas and theatres.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 26, 2016, 05:31:57 PM
I find it extremely difficult to manage multi level (land, air, sea) wars on multiple fronts. It is very easy to get overwhelmed.

I also sometimes find myself becoming fixated on one particular operation/battle and losing sight elsewhere.
.

This! Exactly my problem.

I reloaded an older save of my most current game. This time, I started war justification politics on Poland earlier than before, and Italy managed to stay out of a war with France and uk for a little longer. Once Italy went war, it actually fared better and was able to hold the border until I defeated Poland and was able to redeploy eastern front armies over to the west. Additionally, the Netherlands has not joined the allies yet, so I have been able to bypass the Dutch and sweep through Belgium to threaten France. We now have France fighting a two front war. Finally, the us has not sent any expeditionary force to Europe, so I have stable borders and a lot of conquered territory. South Africa and the U.K. Sent some forces over to try to save Poland, but they were surrounded and annihilated. If I can knock out the French, I have a fighting chance.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 27, 2016, 08:52:54 AM
Overall I really like that HOI4 has eliminated the message pop-up spam that used to drive me crazy in HOI3 -- but I agree the game needs to do a better job about alerting you to critical events -- or even basic but still important events, like the fact that you get no notification when new units deploy.

My biggest pet peeves about the game so far -- and it doesn't look like the beta patch has done anything to address them:

1. Absurd air combat attrition. Good case where lack of notification can really hurt you. You might go 5-6 days without checking the air map for sectors you thought were 'quiet', only to find out that you've lost 800 fighters during that span.  It's simply ridiculous how you can lose 3/4 of you entire air force in a week if you're not paying super close attention to everything.

2. AI still builds thousands of rubbish divisions. I hate the fact that the AI clearly does not know how to use the division designer, and so churns out countless weak 'divisions' -- infantry divisions with 4 inf. battalions and no artillery support, that kind of thing. AI also still seems incapable of upgrading tanks and is content to spam light tank units.

3. Amphibious invasion spam. This seems to have gotten even worse with the patch. AI is like the Terminator now with naval invasions. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, until you are dead!  Or more likely, until it has wasted most of its own divisions in hopeless repeated landings. Don't get me wrong -- I like that the AI is aggressive, but don't like that it is suicidal and don't like how easy it is to launch naval invasions. As Germany, I had to send around 18 divisions down to Italy because UK will not stop invading -- in 1940 -- and Italy AI is too stupid to garrison its ports.



 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 03:01:05 AM
France capitulates. This was my primary long term goal. But for a tiny pocket of American divisions in the northwestern most corner of France, Fortress Europe is secure.

the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway all remain thoroughly neutral. However, I'm wondering if a conquest of these nations will enhance or weaken my security. Obviously, so long as they remain independent I'll need to keep adequate combat divisions ready to respond to a change in the diplomatic status. This is unacceptable in the long term since I will most likely need them in the east, so I guess that answers my question. Thoughts on strategy here? Is it better to attack? What about improving the diplomatic relationship and trying to bring them closer to the axis? What about doing nothing and remaining neutral?

A couple of questions....

1. How do you all manage conquered territory? When I get a message that there is resistance to occupation, I typically bring a division or two into that sector. Recently, I designed a new division with an MP brigade attached. Isn't there some kind of garrison division I can build? I know there is a garrison order for armies, but I hate to utilize a veteran army for this duty.

2. How do you stop the sabotage of factories? The obvious solution is putting more troops into garrison. Anything else that can be done?

I'm definitely frustrated by the amphibious invasion spam. Every few weeks a few allied divisions will land in northern France or Germany only to quickly be pushed back into the water. It gets pretty irritating, and even more so since there is no obvious message when forces land. I know there is a little gray message on the right, but it's very hard to notice. I shouldn't have to constantly check my coastline for incursions. I suppose I'll begin fortifying Normandy, just in case the allies get their act together and try something more organized.

I'm also frustrated by the air attrition issue. I can't even begin to imagine the number of losses I've taken. I'm virtually out of airplanes and my factories can't come even close to keeping up. The fact that I've occupied most of Western Europe doesn't seem to be helping. I figured things would settle down in the air once France fell. I'll double check, but I think there are still thousands of enemy aircraft over Western Europe. I presume they are coming from the UK. How effective are antiaircraft batteries in provinces? Germany has pretty heavy air defense throughout, but I'm not sure of the status of the occupied territory.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on June 28, 2016, 05:01:26 AM
Sounds like you've got your hands full.  Your experience is very different from mine with this game.  I'm playing my third game again as Japan having lost the first two because the Soviets kept declaring war on me before the USA could.  Haven't seen much air attrition as you have.  It's probably because in the early game most of my minor country enemies have no air force.

As for controlling resistance in occupied territory I design small divisions with a combat width of 10.  So usually about 3 infantry battalions all in one brigade.  Then put one recon and one military police support unit and you've got a cheap security division.  Set the unit to rookie status so they use only obsolete equipment.  That way you're not wasting your latest gear on just police duty.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 28, 2016, 05:08:15 AM

A couple of questions....

1. How do you all manage conquered territory? When I get a message that there is resistance to occupation, I typically bring a division or two into that sector. Recently, I designed a new division with an MP brigade attached. Isn't there some kind of garrison division I can build? I know there is a garrison order for armies, but I hate to utilize a veteran army for this duty.

2. How do you stop the sabotage of factories? The obvious solution is putting more troops into garrison. Anything else that can be done?

I'm definitely frustrated by the amphibious invasion spam. Every few weeks a few allied divisions will land in northern France or Germany only to quickly be pushed back into the water. It gets pretty irritating, and even more so since there is no obvious message when forces land. I know there is a little gray message on the right, but it's very hard to notice. I shouldn't have to constantly check my coastline for incursions. I suppose I'll begin fortifying Normandy, just in case the allies get their act together and try something more organized.

I'm also frustrated by the air attrition issue. I can't even begin to imagine the number of losses I've taken. I'm virtually out of airplanes and my factories can't come even close to keeping up. The fact that I've occupied most of Western Europe doesn't seem to be helping. I figured things would settle down in the air once France fell. I'll double check, but I think there are still thousands of enemy aircraft over Western Europe. I presume they are coming from the UK. How effective are antiaircraft batteries in provinces? Germany has pretty heavy air defense throughout, but I'm not sure of the status of the occupied territory.


Hope this helps.


Note: I'm on the 1.1.0 beta.

Air Losses
Air missions are set to Fight To The Death and night/day by default. Changing them to day and another type of option will reduce air losses. 
If you set your Bombers to fly missions into an enemy region it will also divert some of the AI fighters there.
For example, as France, if you are fighting Air Superiority in Northern France in 1940, sending bombers into Western Germany will see the AI suddenly place some of it's fighters in Northern France into Western Germany. I've seen a 500 Fighter force go down to 300 after doing this - the other 200 fighters being transferred to the other region. Even if you don't need or want to bomb anything there, just set the bombers to a low casualty avoidance mission, night, and it works.
I guess this is a strategic lure?

Defending Against Naval Invasion
As far as preventing naval invasions, put CAS and Naval Bombers on Naval Strike missions in the vulnerable sea areas as well as Sub patrols. It seems to work for me. Playing as The Reich, the UK seemed to waste a lot of troops on invasions in the north of Germany. Once I placed the missions, they seemed to stop. As a last resort, surface naval will always interfere with a naval invasion but it risks damaging or even sacrificing your navy if you are going up against a stronger foe e.g. Kriegsmarine vs. Royal Navy.
Note that air Naval Strikes against troop transports do NOT work in anything other than the 1.1.0 beta.


Coastal defences. Making a coastal fort, even a level 1, will give an invader a 15% penalty to invade. Two Forts give a whopping -30%. I always invest in a level 1 or 2 Fort in port areas.
Just 1 division with a level two Engineer Company will give you 200% entrenchment. 2 Divisions in a port is my usual basic defence and will hold off an 8-Division invasion force. 3 Divs will usually stop anything.

Air Superiority.
This gives a significant bonus to any combat in the area you have it in. Even if it's just a token force. I broke a month-long deadlock in East Africa by sending 20 Fighters over. The enemy had no air power. My Fighters swung it and I won the stalemate. Never overlook the Air Superiority bonus.



Preventing Resistance
For me, the two considerations for an occupying force are suppression and conservation of manpower and equipment.
For this reason, I build cheap custom Occupation Regiments of Infantry with 3 Battalions of Infantry and an MP Company.
Regiment-size because you are not using them as front line divisions and because they take less manpower per unit. You can build them cheaper (and faster if you deploy them before they finish training).  You can cover three key areas with 3 regiments for the same manpower cost as a full Inf Div which covers only 1 area.
Set them as Low Priority for reinforcements and Equipment and also to use older equipment, and they won't drain your front line divisions.
Creating a separate Theatre for all occupying forces and setting that to Low Priority will further conserve resources.

Also, if you expect future invasions, include Support Artillery, Anti-Air and Engineer Companies.

Alternatively, using Cavalry Battalions will gain a larger Suppression value, as Cavalry are the best type of Battalion for suppressing Resistance. It's your choice.


Occupation Policy
Setting your Occupation Policy can affect the growth of the resistance:


(http://orig05.deviantart.net/3a19/f/2016/180/9/9/gudtyh_by_jack_o_tales-da829vs.jpg)






Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 05:26:26 AM
Excellent. Thanks for the tips guys. Very insightful.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 06:35:07 AM
Preventing Resistance
For me, the two considerations for an occupying force are suppression and conservation of manpower and equipment.
For this reason, I build cheap custom Occupation Regiments of Infantry with 3 Battalions of Infantry and an MP Company.
Regiment-size because you are not using them as front line divisions and because they take less manpower per unit. You can build them cheaper (and faster if you deploy them before they finish training).  You can cover three key areas with 3 regiments for the same manpower cost as a full Inf Div which covers only 1 area.
Set them as Low Priority for reinforcements and Equipment and also to use older equipment, and they won't drain your front line divisions.
Creating a separate Theatre for all occupying forces and setting that to Low Priority will further conserve resources.

Also, if you expect future invasions, include Support Artillery, Anti-Air and Engineer Companies.

Alternatively, using Cavalry Battalions will gain a larger Suppression value, as Cavalry are the best type of Battalion for suppressing Resistance. It's your choice.


I find that divisions with a few regiments of cavalry combined with a MP company (researched up to level 3) are my best solution.
I put a number of these divisions in to an army and give that army a garrison command.

I also have a small 100% mobile army (tanks + motorised/mechanised) in reserve to quickly respond if necessary.

+ everything Iac said.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 07:38:30 AM
+1 to Pete's strategy.  Cavalry have the highest suppression value of any battalion, and so are your best option for reducing resistance / sabotage. As Germany, I design a 'security brigade' of 4 cavalry battalions + MP + Recon (the last not strictly necessary, but I like the added flavor). I build these by the dozens, but I don't bother to train them -- it's fine if they remain "green." Once they've completed basic training, just deploy them, send them to high resistance areas, and watch the resistance % tick down.

I initiated a bit of a flame war on the pdox forum in arguing strongly that division design should *not* be limited by 'army experience points'. I truly hate this mechanic and so I use the mod that eliminates it (sadly that mod isn't compatible with some other important ones, so there's still a bit of a trade off). I don't buy for a second the argument that the 'exp. points' price somehow prevents exploitative play. I want to be able to design divisions as I see fit, when I see fit. And especially since the default division templates HOI4 gives you are such rubbish, I don't see why we should have to wait for months and months to accrue arbitrary 'points' so that we can do basic things like attach engineer and artillery support to our infantry divisions.

Anyway, I like to build a variety of infantry divisions for different purposes. As Germany, my standard build is:

3 regiments x 4 infantry battalions
1 reg. x 2 artillery + x2 AT battalions
Support:  Engineer, Recon, Field Hospital, Logistics, Signals coys.

That's not 'optimal' at all from the game standpoint, but I like that it is much closer to historical reality than what the game otherwise gives you.

I also build *many* Garrison divisions:

3 reg. x 4 inf. bat.
Support coys:  Arty, AT, AA, MP

These are not offensive units. Their sole purpose is to garrison Ports, cities, and fortresses.

Also, I've started using this mod to try to do something, anything about the ridiculous air losses:

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=705221500&searchtext=air (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=705221500&searchtext=air)

Have only just started using it, but it does seem to reduce losses a bit -- and every bit helps.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 08:15:28 AM
thanks for that OOB, Sandman.

Really, guys...there are some great pro-tips in this thread, and putting that together with my growing understanding of the game systems through firsthand play is really helping me grasp this game like no other paradox title before it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 08:23:53 AM
Just wanted to add (although maybe it's too obvious to mention?) -- playing as Germany and trying to fend off constant Allied amphib. landings -- it's necessary to garrison *every* port on the map that you occupy. Every one. Even Level One ports. Allied armies need to capture a port to get supplies flowing (a nice touch of realism). They may land troops on undefended coastline, but unless they capture a port, their supplies are limited, and they are vulnerable. I garrison every port with the Garrison divs. I listed above. I keep a 'reaction' army near Paris / Normandy -- about 6 divisions -- and another army in Northern Germany to repulse invasions near Wilhelmshafen / Denmark. There's no need to defend empty coastline. But essential to garrison ports and have a backup reaction force for the landings that happen elsewhere (and constantly).

Also playing as Germany, your 'partner' Italy starts to become a big headache. AI is not good about garrisoning ports, and UK/USA AI is *constantly* trying to land forces in Sicily and Italy. So, I garrison Italy's ports for them -- definitely all the ports on the western coast -- and keep an army stationed in 'the boot' to react to invasions. Also keep some Ju-87s and obsolete Tac. bombers stationed in Italy. It's a drain of resources, but then, defending Italy really did become a drain on German resources!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 08:33:11 AM
My current game has taken me further, more successfully than ever before. Its early 1941 and I have most of Western Europe under my heel. I have never had to formulate long term strategy, but I find myself in this position now. I'm pretty confident that the Dutch, the Danes and Norwegians will have to be conquered in order to secure and control the North. I believe these invasions will be essentially role-overs.  My armies are experienced, well equipped and capable of pulling off advanced tactics. The big question is where to go next, after those final western European nations are occupied. I don't feel ready to take on the UK or the Reds. An opportunity has presented itself with respect to the Russians. They have invaded Finland, who has asked to join the Axis, but I know if I go to war with Russia now, it will be game over. 

Italy has already been a thorn in my side by getting into wars before I'm ready to launch my own ambitions, but in this game, they managed to stay out of too much trouble. They are currently committed to a war in Greece and they are holding their own without my intervention so far.

Japan has asked for assistance, as has Vichy France. I've been declining these requests...what is the diplomatic consequence or penalty for taking that kind of a position with your allies?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 08:46:30 AM
When building divisions don't forget to look at the combat width.

If you have a frontline of 80 and your division has a combat width of 20 you can fit 4 divisions on the frontline while the rest go to reserve.
If your division had a combat width of 21 only 3 would fit and 17 frontline width is wasted (80 - 21x3).

For that reason I always go for 20 or 40 and avoid all other possibilities.  Adding one piece of artillery might strengthen your one division but could give you a weaker frontline as one entire division gets dropped.   (Base combat width is 80, additional attack directions bring 40 extra per direction)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 28, 2016, 09:03:54 AM
When building divisions don't forget to look at the combat width.

If you have a frontline of 80 and your division has a combat width of 20 you can fit 4 divisions on the frontline while the rest go to reserve.
If your division had a combat width of 21 only 3 would fit and 17 frontline width is wasted (80 - 21x3).

For that reason I always go for 20 or 40 and avoid all other possibilities.  Adding one piece of artillery might strengthen your one division but could give you a weaker frontline as one entire division gets dropped.   (Base combat width is 80, additional attack directions bring 40 extra per direction)

Pete....help me understand this. When you say 'frontline of 80'....80 what?  And 'combat width of 21'....21 what?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 28, 2016, 09:08:21 AM
Combat width

You would have to ask a grog more technical than me but I believe it is the abstraction of how many units you can have fighting on a particular front at a single time.

Number is higher if you are attacking from multiple directions due to having a larger front to work with. At least that's my interpretation
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 09:09:59 AM
When building divisions don't forget to look at the combat width.

If you have a frontline of 80 and your division has a combat width of 20 you can fit 4 divisions on the frontline while the rest go to reserve.
If your division had a combat width of 21 only 3 would fit and 17 frontline width is wasted (80 - 21x3).

For that reason I always go for 20 or 40 and avoid all other possibilities.  Adding one piece of artillery might strengthen your one division but could give you a weaker frontline as one entire division gets dropped.   (Base combat width is 80, additional attack directions bring 40 extra per direction)

Pete....help me understand this. When you say 'frontline of 80'....80 what?  And 'combat width of 21'....21 what?

I don't know what this represents in real life but it is what HOI uses :

from the wiki :

Combat width. Represents the size of the fighting unit. In order to fit in battle, the unit needs to fit into the provided combat width of the battle field. Different unit types increase the designed width with different amount: For example, infantry and armored battalions use 2 width and artillery, anti-tank and anti-air battalions use 3 width. Support battalions do not increase the combat width of a division.
Combat width

Combat width works a lot like in HOI3, but is now more detailed. Each division will have a combat width which will tell you how many divisions fit into the frontline for active fighting. The available width of the combat goes up the more directions you attack from, so tactical flanking is needed if you want to leverage a numerical advantage. Width is also affected by certain combat tactics. Base combat width is 80, where additional directions bring 40 extra per direction. The combat width of a division depends on how it has been designed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 09:18:52 AM
Combat width : bottom line of the column Combat Stats.


(http://www.critical-reviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Screenshot-of-Hearts-of-Iron-4-Division-Designer.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 09:28:10 AM
I have to admit that I completely disregard combat width as a consideration when designing my divisions -- probably ignoring it at my peril, for the reasons Pete mentions. It's my own (admittedly fetishistic) style of play, but I always go for historical verisimilitude even at the cost of what is optimal from a gameplay standpoint.  I get a kick out of fiddling with the division designer, which is a fun tool in and of itself (which is again why I find the exp. points limitation intolerable).

@Jarhead -- my current Germany campaign seems to be tracking your own experience to some extent. The question of 'what to do after France' is a big one. Personally, I completely ignore Scandinavia -- I see no reason to pour resources into trying to conquer Denmark and Norway. Let 'em be. In my last play-thru, I made the (somewhat historical) mistake of getting side-tracked into invading Yugoslavia and the Balkans. Fighting in the mountains, esp. in Greece, is a meat-grinder, and when USSR DOW'd in 1940, I was finished.

Currently, it's March 1941. USA entered the war in Sept. 1940 -- a nasty surprise, and one that I'm pretty irritated over since they joined the war without first being attacked. After defeating France, I turned my focus to the Baltic states. I thought -- why not take Lithuania/Latvia/Estonia, and give myself a huge leg-up in the inevitable war with USSR? The best-laid schemes... Midway through steamrolling the Baltics, I noticed USSR was 'researching' as its national focus: "Assert claims on Baltics". I figured conquering the Baltics would hurt my relationship with USSR -- which so far had been cozy, they were by far my biggest trade partner -- but clearly we were on a collision course. No sooner did USSR finish that nat. focus than I got the warning that USSR was working on war justification against innocent ol' me. I rushed all my armies and 90% of my airforce to the East. I have only a token response force in France, although the West is well garrisoned otherwise.

USSR just declared war and I'm not sure how I'm going to fare. They have a big numbers advantage. I only have 8 panzer divisions in the field, although they're good divisions. Meanwhile, USA has a foothold in Sicily and will soon be pressing north in Italy -- nothing I can do about that now.

USSR declaring war also has the huge downside of strangling your resources flow. I depended hugely on USSR for oil especially. I was doing everything in my power to get Netherlands on my side, since losing their supply of rubber is very difficult to overcome. It's the reason I kept refusing Japan's offer to join the Axis (I'm not sure there's any real cost to refusing). Japan was bound to DOW Netherlands to take DEI. Anyway, Netherlands just up and joined the Allies for no apparent reason after I conquered France. Had no choice but to occupy them. But now I'm completely screwed with my rubber supply -- and rubber is *essential* for aircraft. I've been using all my civ. factories to build Oil/Rubber Plants.

This is my second play-thru where USSR declared war on me (Germany) before summer of '41. The fact that USA joined the Allies *in 1940* is, to my mind, a big problem for someone who ticked the 'AI historical focus' box in the options. That shouldn't really happen. And USSR seems a bit overpowered, and much too eager to initiate war with Germany.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 28, 2016, 09:31:42 AM
Sandman, I agree there on the combat exp needed to create/modify land combat units.

Would much rather have division size limitations tied to research and unit augments tied to combat experience.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 09:50:59 AM
I have to admit that I completely disregard combat width as a consideration when designing my divisions -- probably ignoring it at my peril, for the reasons Pete mentions. It's my own (admittedly fetishistic) style of play, but I always go for historical verisimilitude even at the cost of what is optimal from a gameplay standpoint.  I get a kick out of fiddling with the division designer, which is a fun tool in and of itself (which is again why I find the exp. points limitation intolerable).

@Jarhead -- my current Germany campaign seems to be tracking your own experience to some extent. The question of 'what to do after France' is a big one. Personally, I completely ignore Scandinavia -- I see no reason to pour resources into trying to conquer Denmark and Norway. Let 'em be. In my last play-thru, I made the (somewhat historical) mistake of getting side-tracked into invading Yugoslavia and the Balkans. Fighting in the mountains, esp. in Greece, is a meat-grinder, and when USSR DOW'd in 1940, I was finished.

Currently, it's March 1941. USA entered the war in Sept. 1940 -- a nasty surprise, and one that I'm pretty irritated over since they joined the war without first being attacked. After defeating France, I turned my focus to the Baltic states. I thought -- why not take Lithuania/Latvia/Estonia, and give myself a huge leg-up in the inevitable war with USSR? The best-laid schemes... Midway through steamrolling the Baltics, I noticed USSR was 'researching' as its national focus: "Assert claims on Baltics". I figured conquering the Baltics would hurt my relationship with USSR -- which so far had been cozy, they were by far my biggest trade partner -- but clearly we were on a collision course. No sooner did USSR finish that nat. focus than I got the warning that USSR was working on war justification against innocent ol' me. I rushed all my armies and 90% of my airforce to the East. I have only a token response force in France, although the West is well garrisoned otherwise.

USSR just declared war and I'm not sure how I'm going to fare. They have a big numbers advantage. I only have 8 panzer divisions in the field, although they're good divisions. Meanwhile, USA has a foothold in Sicily and will soon be pressing north in Italy -- nothing I can do about that now.

USSR declaring war also has the huge downside of strangling your resources flow. I depended hugely on USSR for oil especially. I was doing everything in my power to get Netherlands on my side, since losing their supply of rubber is very difficult to overcome. It's the reason I kept refusing Japan's offer to join the Axis (I'm not sure there's any real cost to refusing). Japan was bound to DOW Netherlands to take DEI. Anyway, Netherlands just up and joined the Allies for no apparent reason after I conquered France. Had no choice but to occupy them. But now I'm completely screwed with my rubber supply -- and rubber is *essential* for aircraft. I've been using all my civ. factories to build Oil/Rubber Plants.

This is my second play-thru where USSR declared war on me (Germany) before summer of '41. The fact that USA joined the Allies *in 1940* is, to my mind, a big problem for someone who ticked the 'AI historical focus' box in the options. That shouldn't really happen. And USSR seems a bit overpowered, and much too eager to initiate war with Germany.

Fascinating. Yes, very similar to my experience, but my strategic situation seems a bit better than yours as I annexed Yugoslavia through national focus, have not gotten involved in the war in Greece, the Italians are not opposing any invasions on the mainland and am still existing peacefully with the Netherlands. I was convinced I was going to attack the Dutch, but your comments on rubber supply have raised a valuable strategic consideration that I had not thought about. I  need to look at where I'm obtaining this resource from and see how a DOW would impact me. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 10:15:38 AM
I'm not sure there's any surefire solution for rubber where Germany is concerned. UK and Netherlands have cornered the market on world rubber production. Obviously, UK is not a viable trading source in the longterm. Japan DOWing Netherlands seems like a certainty in almost any play-thru, so letting Japan into the Axis is a big risk if you're trying to cozy up to Netherlands. There's a 'befriend Netherlands' national focus point in the German tree, although it gives you more of an 'intimidation' edge over Net. rather than getting them into the Axis.

On a future play-thru, I think I will try to get Netherlands into the Axis from day one. Boost the Dutch fascist party. Improve relations. Encourage a fascist coup when the party seems powerful enough. Otherwise I think Net. is all but hardcoded to join the Allies. The fact that they just joined the Allies -- even after I conquered France!! -- in my current game speaks to that. I really wanted Net. to at least remain neutral, or go to war with Japan if that was inevitable anyway. But I deliberately avoided attacking Net. when going for the French invasion -- the WW1 Schlieffen plan, bulldoze Belgium, honor Dutch 'neutrality'. All for naught.

The other thing Germany should probably do, from day one -- start building synthetic Oil/Rubber plants. Many of them. They're expensive and take a long time (prob. good to the get the minister -- Schacht? -- that gives you a construction bonus). It also comes at the expense of building other improvements, military factories and AAA especially. Otherwise, the rubber deficit is all but insurmountable. Even when war comes with USSR, you can get get Oil from Romania and South America. Tungsten from Sweden. Aluminum from Hungary. But beyond a small amount from Siam, and scraps from places like Brazil, there's just no other source out there for rubber.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 10:29:50 AM
^what about invading and taking the Dutch colonial possessions that generate rubber? Although logistically difficult for Germany, it seems that this would be a viable strategy if taking these colonies would shift resource production to Germany. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 28, 2016, 10:33:15 AM
I am trying to keep up but the posts are so long in this thread that it's difficult. I'm getting ready to start a game are there any "must-have "mods around? the ones that almost everybody gets or you really need to deal with an  inherent design problem or bug
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 10:39:22 AM
My guess -- and just a guess -- is that it should be all but impossible for Germany to do that. To launch an amphib. invasion, you need to have 'sea supremacy' between you and your target. Even from the French west coast -- that's a lot of ocean territory between you and the Dutch East Indies! I suppose maybe you could station German divisions in Italian-occupied East Africa and try launching an invasion from there.

I suppose that would also mean making a big push to build a strong German surface fleet -- and I just don't see how that's possible without seriously compromising production of more important land and air forces. Naval combat is unfortunately pretty lame in HOI4 right now -- AI seems to use the "Combine all your ships into a super fleet and roam the waves" strategy that's all but impossible for weaker navies to counter. Also, port strikes are *devastating* (probably way overpowered at the moment) and very difficult to counter even with solid air cover. So the odds of Germany building a powerful surface fleet are pretty slim. Royal Navy is too powerful, and protecting your ports from airstrikes too difficult.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 28, 2016, 10:50:02 AM
When building divisions don't forget to look at the combat width.

If you have a frontline of 80 and your division has a combat width of 20 you can fit 4 divisions on the frontline while the rest go to reserve.
If your division had a combat width of 21 only 3 would fit and 17 frontline width is wasted (80 - 21x3).

For that reason I always go for 20 or 40 and avoid all other possibilities.  Adding one piece of artillery might strengthen your one division but could give you a weaker frontline as one entire division gets dropped.   (Base combat width is 80, additional attack directions bring 40 extra per direction)

Pete....help me understand this. When you say 'frontline of 80'....80 what?  And 'combat width of 21'....21 what?

I don't know what this represents in real life but it is what HOI uses :

from the wiki :

Combat width. Represents the size of the fighting unit. In order to fit in battle, the unit needs to fit into the provided combat width of the battle field. Different unit types increase the designed width with different amount: For example, infantry and armored battalions use 2 width and artillery, anti-tank and anti-air battalions use 3 width. Support battalions do not increase the combat width of a division.
Combat width

Combat width works a lot like in HOI3, but is now more detailed. Each division will have a combat width which will tell you how many divisions fit into the frontline for active fighting. The available width of the combat goes up the more directions you attack from, so tactical flanking is needed if you want to leverage a numerical advantage. Width is also affected by certain combat tactics. Base combat width is 80, where additional directions bring 40 extra per direction. The combat width of a division depends on how it has been designed.


Thanks Pete....your screenie helped with division width, but where do you find the combat width of the battlefield?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 10:54:07 AM
Also worth pointing out that, although the rubber crunch is a problem for Germany, the malus for lacking a resource isn't too severe. If you're producing a vehicle, say a fighter plane, and have all the resources but completely lack the required rubber, you'll take a max. 30% production hit -- which I *think* means those aircraft will take 30% longer to build than if you had the necessary rubber. (Arguably that's way too lenient -- something like 50-75% would feel more realistic to me).

Still, given the insane casualty rates for air combat, and the fact that aircraft demand more rubber than anything else you build, any shortfall in rubber definitely hurts.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 28, 2016, 11:01:01 AM
I am trying to keep up but the posts are so long in this thread that it's difficult. I'm getting ready to start a game are there any "must-have "mods around? the ones that almost everybody gets or you really need to deal with an  inherent design problem or bug

There are no "must have" mods in my opinion. However, the mod that permits you to modify, edit and create new division templates without the need for army experience points is useful. The color buttons mod, the more theater symbols mod, and the mod that adds more historical names to equipment are helpful. Otherwise, the mods I use all add more historical flavor, such as more period music, use of historical flags, etc.

Keep in mind, a lot of the mods are not compatible with the beta version of the upcoming patch.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 11:05:16 AM
I am trying to keep up but the posts are so long in this thread that it's difficult. I'm getting ready to start a game are there any "must-have "mods around? the ones that almost everybody gets or you really need to deal with an  inherent design problem or bug

Mike -- echoing JH's point -- right now, things are still so raw and in flux with HOI4 that there are probably no completely *essential* mods. To me, the game feels pretty unbalanced in several different areas, and I don't think any mod 'corrects' those balances so much as shifts them in different (and no less problematic) directions. The upcoming 1.1.0 patch does the same thing (I'm using the beta) -- it's corrected some imbalances but introduced new ones as well. It's going to take a lot of time to get it right, patches and mods-wise.

I use several mods, but beyond the "No Experience Req. for Division Designs" mod -- and that's really just personal preference -- there are no other mods that I feel I have to use. Lots of graphics / cosmetic stuff, but again that's all personal preference.

The big 'rebalancing' mod at the moment is:

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=704100462&searchtext= (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=704100462&searchtext=)

I tried it in an aborted play-thru.  It clearly makes the AI divisions more powerful, but maybe too much so. I was playing as USA and at one point decided to see what AI Germany was doing, so loaded up a save -- and was flabbergasted. Germany had literally over 20,000 tanks in the field (in 1941). Production numbers seemed off the charts. Case in point, I think, of how 'rebalancing' at this point really means 'unbalancing in new directions.'
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 11:12:41 AM
Thanks Pete....your screenie helped with division width, but where do you find the combat width of the battlefield?

Click on a battle icon - the middle row shows your width, combat area width and the enemy's number.

(this is an older picture - where you see 30 for combat area width, now you should see 80,120 or 160)


(http://i.imgur.com/6JwgHXV.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 28, 2016, 11:24:50 AM
Pete...again, thanks. The depth of detail in this game just keeps unfolding deeper and deeper. Personally, I think it's an incredible accomplishment.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 11:42:17 AM
Personally, I think it's an incredible accomplishment.

Agree 100%.  HOI4 has a 1,001 problems right now, but even so, it's an absolutely amazing game. And it will only improve from here.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 28, 2016, 11:42:45 AM

I initiated a bit of a flame war on the pdox forum in arguing strongly that division design should *not* be limited by 'army experience points'. I truly hate this mechanic and so I use the mod that eliminates it (sadly that mod isn't compatible with some other important ones, so there's still a bit of a trade off).

It's been updated: "Now compatible with other mods like expanded industry, thanks to Kaseyawolf2!"
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698620155

Quote
I don't buy for a second the argument that the 'exp. points' price somehow prevents exploitative play. I want to be able to design divisions as I see fit, when I see fit. And especially since the default division templates HOI4 gives you are such rubbish, I don't see why we should have to wait for months and months to accrue arbitrary 'points' so that we can do basic things like attach engineer and artillery support to our infantry divisions.

I agree entirely but for purists there is a way in-game to accrue Land Experience faster, even in peacetime. If you set all land forces on Exercise and also add a particular general/minister to your government/high command, there's a steady experience increase. The minister/general in question is available in either chief of army, high command or ministers. He adds a + x% per day.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 28, 2016, 11:53:45 AM

I initiated a bit of a flame war on the pdox forum in arguing strongly that division design should *not* be limited by 'army experience points'. I truly hate this mechanic and so I use the mod that eliminates it (sadly that mod isn't compatible with some other important ones, so there's still a bit of a trade off).

It's been updated: "Now compatible with other mods like expanded industry, thanks to Kaseyawolf2!"
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=698620155

Quote
I don't buy for a second the argument that the 'exp. points' price somehow prevents exploitative play. I want to be able to design divisions as I see fit, when I see fit. And especially since the default division templates HOI4 gives you are such rubbish, I don't see why we should have to wait for months and months to accrue arbitrary 'points' so that we can do basic things like attach engineer and artillery support to our infantry divisions.

I agree entirely but for purists there is a way in-game to accrue Land Experience faster, even in peacetime. If you set all land forces on Exercise and also add a particular general/minister to your government/high command, there's a steady experience increase. The minister/general in question is available in either chief of army, high command or ministers. He adds a + x% per day.

Except that's at a cost of extremely high attrition. I would much rather have a max pool design on how you can build divisions that is upgraded by research. You are almost being charged twice to create INF divisions... Once to design then and then you need the supplies to actually build them.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 28, 2016, 11:56:33 AM
I agree entirely but for purists there is a way in-game to accrue Land Experience faster, even in peacetime. If you set all land forces on Exercise and also add a particular general/minister to your government/high command, there's a steady experience increase. The minister/general in question is available in either chief of army, high command or ministers. He adds a + x% per day.

I guess I'm a purist then  ;D.

I get the idea why Paradox introduced this 'feature' : only through training and combat you find out your divisions are not what they should be and how you should change them.
Also you can't change the total structure of a division at once because this could create chaos (and that's why you are limited to the available XP).

The one thing I was missing is included in the new beta : create a blank division template.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 28, 2016, 12:02:42 PM
I don't want to rehash the thread I posted on Pdox forum, but I truly don't understand the decision to link division design to army exp. points. I don't see how removing the cost would be 'unbalancing' -- just because you can design great big powerful divisions doesn't mean you can necessarily *build* them (it takes manpower and equipment), and you still have to unlock better tanks, equipment etc. through the tech tree, which discourages tech rushing (correctly) by the ahead-of-time penalty.

I think the exp. point system makes perfect sense for aircraft/vehicle/ship upgrades.

@Pete -- I'm by no means suggesting 'you're wrong!' -- I get what you're saying. I just differ on the 'philosophy' of division design. I think military doctrine is a greater determinant of divisional structure than 'past experience' -- that, and limitations of manpower and equipment (e.g. the Wehrmacht didn't reduce the size of its panzer divisions in '40/'41 because of doctrinal changes so much as they didn't have sufficient tanks to fill out the envisioned TOE of the earlier, larger divisional structure).

I also think the exp. points cost is a bit of a cover for the larger problem: the AI's inability to build and upgrade proper divisions in the first place.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on June 28, 2016, 04:45:38 PM

I think the exp. point system makes perfect sense for aircraft/vehicle/ship upgrades.


I also think the exp. points cost is a bit of a cover for the larger problem: the AI's inability to build and upgrade proper divisions in the first place.

I'm 100% in agreement with you here. 

Division structure, especially when it comes to the decision to implement medium/heavy armor shouldn't be tied to Army XP.  Just as one example out of many, the Panzer III was developed prior even to the Spanish Civil War.  Certianly the Wehrmacht didn't need any battlefield experience to decide to employ a design they were already considering using.   This, for me, seems to apply to a lot of the division designs. 

Moreover, the AI just can't use the system as it stands. 

I feel like historically, the XP concept, as you say, is best left to designing vehicle variants, as that was where practical knowledge tended to change the on paper ideas.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on June 28, 2016, 09:06:59 PM
I don't think tying army xp and division templates is a terrible idea, it just needs to be much cheaper.

I just finished my first game and I really, really like the game. I played as the Soviets and started in '39. I went the historic route and annexed the Baltics and part of Romania and fought a war with Finland. Unlike Stalin, I launched the attack in May 1940 and crushed them. Anyway, I much prefer playing large countries like the USSR in HOI4 versus HOI3. That battle plans work very well, not perfectly, but very well. I much prefer the way you handle your airforces... it just makes tons more sense when you abstract it like they did. That also goes with the naval war, it just works better IMO. I don't mind the naval invasion system, because you need to control the sea and air zones where your invading anyway, plus the invasion takes a long time to plan. I think it all works well. I have already mentioned my praise of the production system and that praise stands after the first game.

Now, here is where I get negative. The AI can really get lost, as far as addressing the priorities of a worldwide empire like Japan, the UK, or the US. After I defeated Germany in '44 (mostly because their air forces were ground to nothing by the Allies), I set about defeating Japan. To the AI's credit, it managed to conquer China and grab India from the UK, so it had a vast empire. I began retaking China and had almost completed the process by the summer of '45. When I invaded the home islands, they had almost nothing there. My armored columns conquered the main island in less than 2 weeks. What a shame.

Also, AI Japan didn't pursue a naval war in the Pacific at all. This is a problem in HOI going back a long ways and they just can't fix it. Another shame. In addition, when I invaded the home islands they still had a powerful fleet. Even without ground forces in Japan, they still could have prevented me from landing if it utilized its naval forces correctly.

One final thing: Infrastructure repair takes far too long to accomplish. There is no way to keep up with repairs if your army is on the advance and your troops will attrit. In reality, it was pretty easy to fix rail lines and keep your armies in supply. Here, your construction queue will fill up with a long list a repairs that will take years to fix.

Having said those negative things, I still highly recommend the game. Even though the Japan AI provided an anti-climactic end to the war, it was a fun game. I will wait on my next game for a few months until the AI is addressed in a major way.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: W8taminute on June 29, 2016, 05:06:36 AM
^I agree, the costs for changing a division around should be a tad bit cheaper.  Although I would love to have a blank division template I think it should be an optional feature.

I believe what pdox is trying to accomplish with not having a blank division template is an attempt at simulating the realities of military organization.  Correct me if I'm wrong but even today when a nation's military looks at their army division structures do the planners start with a blank division template or do they look at the existing template and modify it based on current military trends, their own experience, political situations, etc.?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on June 29, 2016, 05:19:06 AM
Although I would love to have a blank division template I think it should be an optional feature.

This is included in the upcoming patch 1.1 (and is the current available beta).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 29, 2016, 05:48:19 AM
Well...my great game as Germany and all my grandiose plans went to $hit last night after Russia declared war and invaded. The 48 divisions I had on the frontier were entirely overwhelmed by the Red onslaught. Within months, the Russians reached Warsaw and I simply do not see anyway to stop the juggernaut and turn the tide. How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 29, 2016, 06:22:06 AM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

What is your Conscription setting set to?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 29, 2016, 07:01:09 AM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

What is your Conscription setting set to?

Manpower is not the problem. The problem is the time it takes to recruit, train and equip new divisions. Yes, deploying green divisions would put more manpower into the field faster, but I'm not sure there would be any real strategic benefit to this.

What is the consensus on how many divisions to recruit and train at once? I'm assuming the more units in training at any one time, the slower they are actually trained...particularly if there is not enough equipment to go around.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on June 29, 2016, 07:08:41 AM
My question is how are those red divisions combat worthy ?

I mean the Soviets issue was always equipment; a crack, supplied german div should roll through the Soviet line if they are throwing out green undersupplied divisions.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 29, 2016, 07:13:08 AM
My question is how are those red divisions combat worthy ?

I mean the Soviets issue was always equipment; a crack, supplied german div should roll through the Soviet line if they are throwing out green undersupplied divisions.

I have to assume the AI does not make the same historical mistakes of Stalin. No officer purge and perhaps R&D, and modernization in more of a priority than political consolidation? I'll hop in tonight and see what intel I can gather on the quality and TO&E of the Soviet divisions.  As posted by someone earlier, when they went and looked at this after being defeated, they were shocked at the quality and level of technology of the AI enemy.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 29, 2016, 07:55:34 AM
What is the consensus on how many divisions to recruit and train at once? I'm assuming the more units in training at any one time, the slower they are actually trained...particularly if there is not enough equipment to go around.

I have a copy open of John Ellis' World War II Databook (US: https://www.amazon.com/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  if you don't own one, order one right now. You won't be disappointed).

For Germany, around 25-35 Infantry Divisions per year for 1941-44.

Not including pre-1939 divisions, here are the historical numbers of German Army builds for each year:

1939
Panzer: 1
Motorised: 2 SS
Infantry: 63 includes 1 Security division
Mountain:1

1940
Panzer: 11
Motorised: 2 SS, 8 Regular
Infantry: 49 includes 1 Security division
Light & Jager: 4
Mountain: 3

1941
Panzer: 2
Motorised: 1 SS
Infantry: 29 includes 1 Security division
Light & Jager: 4
Mountain: 3

1942
Panzer: 1 SS, 5 Regular
Motorised: 2 SS
Infantry: 26 includes 1 Security division
Light & Jager: 2
Mountain: 1
Cavalry: 1 SS
Luftwaffe Infantry: 17

1943
Panzer: 7 SS, 2 Regular
Motorised: 5 SS, 3 Regular
Infantry: 3 SS, 28 Regular
Light & Jager: 5
Mountain: 1
Cavalry:1
Airborne: 5
Luftwaffe Infantry: 3

1944
Panzer: 1
Motorised: 1 SS, 1 Regular
Infantry: 2 SS, 14 Regular + 20 Volksgrenadier Divisions
Light & Jager: 2
Cavalry: 1 SS, 1 Regular 
Airborne: 4

1945
Infantry: 1
Mountain: 2
Airborne: 1
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on June 29, 2016, 08:24:50 AM
Well...my great game as Germany and all my grandiose plans went to $hit last night after Russia declared war and invaded. The 48 divisions I had on the frontier were entirely overwhelmed by the Red onslaught. Within months, the Russians reached Warsaw and I simply do not see anyway to stop the juggernaut and turn the tide. How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Shall we just start calling you tovarich Jarhead on the forums, then?   :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 29, 2016, 02:31:32 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Philippe on June 29, 2016, 02:48:07 PM
My own personal theory is that Paradox has some kind of secret aversion to reproducing history.  If I'm right about that, I wonder if that isn't what's going on here.  If a designer buys in to the concept of the primacy of alternate history, it absolves him from having to worry about a lot of historical research.

(I've given up wondering if it will ever be possible to re-enact Columbus' First Voyage in Europa Universalis).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 29, 2016, 03:05:17 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.

A friend of mine playing HOI4 has Germany dominating the world.  He dropped paras on Brittain in 1937 and conquered them out of the war by 38.  This left him free to run rampant in Afrika take Turkey and initiate Barbarossa by 41.  Currently he has crushed the Comintern and is now rolling his Panzer Divisions against the US in the Pacific theater.

I am playing Italy and we just hit May 43 before the Russians started the war.  I am currently taking Turkey and then plan on entrenching my mountain divisions in the Caucuses and Ashabad mountain ranges.  Lets see if we can hold off the bear.

Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on June 29, 2016, 03:15:42 PM
 So maybe the secret is to take out Britain first then go for France?  that way you can completely concentrate on Russia when the time comes.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on June 29, 2016, 03:27:58 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.

A friend of mine playing HOI4 has Germany dominating the world.  He dropped paras on Brittain in 1937 and conquered them out of the war by 38.  This left him free to run rampant in Afrika take Turkey and initiate Barbarossa by 41.  Currently he has crushed the Comintern and is now rolling his Panzer Divisions against the US in the Pacific theater.

I am playing Italy and we just hit May 43 before the Russians started the war.  I am currently taking Turkey and then plan on entrenching my mountain divisions in the Caucuses and Ashabad mountain ranges.  Lets see if we can hold off the bear.

Con

Pics...or it didn't happen.

How are airborne units going to be able to take control of the UK without armor, mechanized and heavier infantry support? How was he able to build enough airborne units and transports to get enough boots on the ground by 1937? What about the other allied powers? When he declared war on the UK, didn't the UK bring France and everyone else into the war? If so, how was he able to hold the Seigfried line? i would expect his divisions in mainland Germany to be minimal since he would have to have placed so much effort into building those airborne units.

I dunno...I'm sure its possible, given a lot of luck, but still...I'm pretty skeptical.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 29, 2016, 03:56:33 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.

A friend of mine playing HOI4 has Germany dominating the world.  He dropped paras on Brittain in 1937 and conquered them out of the war by 38.  This left him free to run rampant in Afrika take Turkey and initiate Barbarossa by 41.  Currently he has crushed the Comintern and is now rolling his Panzer Divisions against the US in the Pacific theater.

I am playing Italy and we just hit May 43 before the Russians started the war.  I am currently taking Turkey and then plan on entrenching my mountain divisions in the Caucuses and Ashabad mountain ranges.  Lets see if we can hold off the bear.

Con

Pics...or it didn't happen.

How are airborne units going to be able to take control of the UK without armor, mechanized and heavier infantry support? How was he able to build enough airborne units and transports to get enough boots on the ground by 1937? What about the other allied powers? When he declared war on the UK, didn't the UK bring France and everyone else into the war? If so, how was he able to hold the Seigfried line? i would expect his divisions in mainland Germany to be minimal since he would have to have placed so much effort into building those airborne units.

I dunno...I'm sure its possible, given a lot of luck, but still...I'm pretty skeptical.
Well he told me he followed some advice he got on HOI4 on youtube I think.  I will ask him for some pics.  BAsed on how our lunch conversations on HOI4 are I believe him but proof of his diabolical plans are necessary.

Here is the youtube link


Con
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 29, 2016, 03:57:03 PM
I should have been more specific -- I think for someone who wants to follow a more or less historical path and timeline, playing as Germany becomes really difficult due to USSR's huge accumulation of divisions by 1940-41, combined with USSR's general aggressiveness and USA's penchant for entering the war too early.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 29, 2016, 04:15:15 PM
My own personal theory is that Paradox has some kind of secret aversion to reproducing history.


I don't think it's anything so conspiratorial. I think you're vastly underestimating the challenges of getting a game like HOI4 - a real time simulation (using the term loosely) of the whole world - to reproduce history. There are almost countless variables at play.  I think HOI4 makes an admirable attempt - the national focus trees are clearly intended to get the player and the AI to follow a roughly historical path. But short of outright scripting events (and the nat. focuses do a little of that already), I'm not sure there's any real way to get HOI4 to resemble history with much accuracy.

I think Pdox has 'learned to stop worrying and love alternative history'. It's surely no accident that the 2 big pre-release trailers featured unhistorical scenarios -- Germany conquers UK / USSR conquers Europe and then goes to war with Japan.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 29, 2016, 05:08:36 PM
I have never understood people who want five million variables in an historical simulation, then complain that they can't repeat history exactly.  If you went back to 1936 and started history over, I bet it wouldn't come out the same.  If you want to repeat history exactly, you're better off just reading a history book.

I find HOI4 great to play and find most decisions fairly plausible.  Is the AI perfect and great...no.  But I have seen any number of humans make stupid mistakes and decisions.  There are people who have their pet peeves on any game and will spend more time testing our those peeves than playing the game.  The key word is "game"...play it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on June 29, 2016, 05:23:34 PM
I have never understood people who want five million variables in an historical simulation, then complain that they can't repeat history exactly.  If you went back to 1936 and started history over, I bet it wouldn't come out the same.  If you want to repeat history exactly, you're better off just reading a history book.

I find HOI4 great to play and find most decisions fairly plausible.  Is the AI perfect and great...no.  But I have seen any number of humans make stupid mistakes and decisions.  There are people who have their pet peeves on any game and will spend more time testing our those peeves than playing the game.  The key word is "game"...play it.

+1 Couldn't have wrote any better myself!!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on June 29, 2016, 06:12:40 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.

In my game as the USSR, I had a historical amount of divisions (~330) while the Germans had 500-700. The AI produces too many divisions (poor quality as mentioned). Venezuela joined the Axis in my game and sent 16 divisions as an expeditionary force. There is some definite balancing issues that need to be addressed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 29, 2016, 06:28:18 PM
Country with the biggest army in my world is France. About 900 divs.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on June 29, 2016, 07:16:01 PM
My point us that on these and the Pdox forums, one person complains the USSR doesn't build enough divisions and a few days later someone complains its building too many.  There are so many variables and settings, I am not sure anyone can compare games without listing a whole heap of settings.  Walking in and saying just "XXX builds too many cheap divisions" adds very little to figuring balance out.

I always think about Nazi Germany not  putting the economy on a war footing until 1942.  If the AI did that, people would be screaming for someone's head at Pdox.  How about taking all of your carriers, putting them in one giant "super-fleet", and attacking the largest US naval base in the Pacific?  Or how about invading the China with a relatively small army in 1937?  If the AI did any of those things, we would be calling it one of the worst AIs ever.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 29, 2016, 07:27:00 PM
My point us that on these and the Pdox forums, one person complains the USSR doesn't build enough divisions and a few days later someone complains its building too many.  There are so many variables and settings, I am not sure anyone can compare games without listing a whole heap of settings.  Walking in and saying just "XXX builds too many cheap divisions" adds very little to figuring balance out.

I always think about Nazi Germany not  putting the economy on a war footing until 1942.  If the AI did that, people would be screaming for someone's head at Pdox.  How about taking all of your carriers, putting them in one giant "super-fleet", and attacking the largest US naval base in the Pacific?  Or how about invading the China with a relatively small army in 1937?  If the AI did any of those people things, we would be calling it one of the worst AIs ever.

Unfortunately the setting of the game attracts an infinite amount of passionate nitpicking. It's the same with Gary Grigsby stuff.

We don't see complaining at this level in EU.  And people accept all sorts wacky un-historical results there.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 29, 2016, 08:25:34 PM
How the hell can a player as Germany recruit and deploy enough divisions to score a quick win in the west and if not be in a position to invade Russia, at least have enough security on the eastern border to hold them?

Bingo -- this is the problem.  HOI4 is hugely unbalanced right now on many levels, one of the most damaging being the AI's *massive overproduction* of divisions. Many of them are crappy divisions, but when you crank out 700 divisions, well, as Stalin is supposed to have said, quantity has a quality all its own. Unfortunately that number is not an exaggeration. In my current game as Germany, the info. on the 'current wars' screen shows that USSR has somewhere between 500-900 divisions. I have around 200. I dug up a fact recently that indicated the USA, at the *peak* of its power toward the end of WW2, never had more than around 230-240 divisions *in all the services combined*. Even for the feared Soviet hordes, 700 divisions seems a tad overkill.

I don't see how the Germany player can possibly contend with USSR as HOI4 currently stands. In a couple of aborted play-thrus I've experienced playing Germany, USSR declared war on me every time. I never initiated Barbarossa, because USSR was itching to fight well before June '41. In my current game, it's Sept. '41 -- USSR declared war on me months ago and we are locked in a death match. I can't initiate any offensive, because all I'm doing is trying to hold a long front-line that extends from Estonia down to Romania. I easily have 80% of my divisions and 95% of my airforce committed to holding the Russians back, and I also have ample help from Italian, Hungarian, Romanian, and Yugoslavian allies. But it's like the proverbial dam that springing leaks everywhere. There's only a limited number of fingers I can use to plug the leaks, and sooner or later, the whole thing's gonna give way.

So yeah, not sure what to say. HOI4 seems fairly unplayable as Germany. USA joins the war way too early, and USSR gets the jump on you every time.

A friend of mine playing HOI4 has Germany dominating the world.  He dropped paras on Brittain in 1937 and conquered them out of the war by 38.  This left him free to run rampant in Afrika take Turkey and initiate Barbarossa by 41.  Currently he has crushed the Comintern and is now rolling his Panzer Divisions against the US in the Pacific theater.

I am playing Italy and we just hit May 43 before the Russians started the war.  I am currently taking Turkey and then plan on entrenching my mountain divisions in the Caucuses and Ashabad mountain ranges.  Lets see if we can hold off the bear.

Con

Pics...or it didn't happen.

How are airborne units going to be able to take control of the UK without armor, mechanized and heavier infantry support? How was he able to build enough airborne units and transports to get enough boots on the ground by 1937? What about the other allied powers? When he declared war on the UK, didn't the UK bring France and everyone else into the war? If so, how was he able to hold the Seigfried line? i would expect his divisions in mainland Germany to be minimal since he would have to have placed so much effort into building those airborne units.

I dunno...I'm sure its possible, given a lot of luck, but still...I'm pretty skeptical.
So I got the pics from my friends game...its a true screenie since he doesnt have Fraps and he never has really done any posting on blogs he went the easy route and took photos of his screen with his iphone and sent them to me! :)

Here they are showing the German Reich owning the Comintern invading Brazil, fighting in the pacific and occupying the UK.
(http://i1159.photobucket.com/albums/p623/conradmaher/IMG_2100_zpsfp6hg8eu.jpg)

(http://i1159.photobucket.com/albums/p623/conradmaher/IMG_2099_zpsn5tfklpr.jpg)

(http://i1159.photobucket.com/albums/p623/conradmaher/IMG_2098_zpswuayxyfv.jpg)

(http://i1159.photobucket.com/albums/p623/conradmaher/IMG_2097_zps1dnyaz4g.jpg)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on June 29, 2016, 09:01:33 PM


Unfortunately the setting of the game attracts an infinite amount of passionate nitpicking. It's the same with Gary Grigsby stuff.

We don't see complaining at this level in EU.  And people accept all sorts wacky un-historical results there.

Well.  EU 4 is pretty much patched-up EU 3 with a new skin.  And when EU 3 came out, people were screaming like banshees.  Let's see how much fire HOI 4 is drawing 9-1/2 years worth of patches from now if it actually survives as long as EU 3 has (even if it's called HOI 9 by then).

I'm not totally arguing with you, far more people know far more about WW2 history than about 1444-1820 history, and that just gives more opportunity for complaints.  But as I remember, EU 3 was not warmly received out of the box.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on June 29, 2016, 09:41:02 PM
I'm finding that this game hurts my brain  :uglystupid2:

I'm a 20 yr MMO'er and I'm used to spamming buttons and combat combos, etc....I'm always in a rush to get to the end prize. That approach is toxic for a game like this (for any strategy game for that matter....hell, I even struggled a little with the Battle Academy series and that's pretty beer & pretzels for strategy games).

I was playing as Brazil and I conquered Uruguay (that's like saying you beat up a 1 armed 5 yr old). Anyways....by end of 1941 I thought I could take Argentina. WRONG. Got my ass handed to me. I found myself giving up and left it on the highest game speed....."racing" to my inevitable end.

Maybe this game and the ilk aren't for me  :crazy2: Maybe I'll re-start my Brazil game and take it one month (game time) at a time...go slow (if that's possible)

One good thing is coming from this......I now feel the urge to get into the "touchy feely" gaming. Time to paint some 6mm mini's and go "voom....voom" on the table top!  O0

Thanks all for this thread.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 29, 2016, 09:41:34 PM
Actually later patches of EU4 were not well recieved too. Expensive / unbalancing / unusable by AI.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: dinsdale on June 29, 2016, 10:42:01 PM
Country with the biggest army in my world is France. About 900 divs.
900 or 90?

Seriously, if any country is building 900 divisions its ludicrous. France had a population of 40 million in 1945, and is able to put out 18 million front line troops. Conscription of all men and women from age 4 and up?

The Soviets had between 500 and 600 in 1945, most of them understrength. The idea that half the population of France is in a front line combat division puts realism to be somewhere adrift of Risk.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 29, 2016, 11:14:17 PM
900. Probobly got some from colonies abroad too. They own most of Africa.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JasonPratt on June 30, 2016, 11:27:30 AM
But is that 900 at 10% strength? -- so like 90 divs but 10x spread out in manpower?  :-\
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 30, 2016, 12:14:30 PM

So I got the pics from my friends game...its a true screenie since he doesnt have Fraps and he never has really done any posting on blogs he went the easy route and took photos of his screen with his iphone and sent them to me! :)

Here they are showing the German Reich owning the Comintern invading Brazil, fighting in the pacific and occupying the UK.

(http://i1159.photobucket.com/albums/p623/conradmaher/IMG_2097_zps1dnyaz4g.jpg)

He has 8 Nukes and has taken over most of the world. Also not too concerned about doing more research or a National Focus. I'd say it's not unlikely he might be using the help of console cheats. What is the date?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Con on June 30, 2016, 01:39:32 PM
For sure he has no ideas on how to use consoles.  I had to explain Fraps to him.  I dont know when he took these pictures but at lunch today he told me he is in the late 1950s right now and trying to get his allies to commit to a landwar in South America.  His goal is total world domination as the Germans

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Boggit on June 30, 2016, 02:28:43 PM
In your opinion, has the game turned out to be Risk on steroids? ???
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on June 30, 2016, 03:16:04 PM
at lunch today he told me he is in the late 1950s right now

That explains it then, I had no idea the game could be played that long.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on June 30, 2016, 04:08:41 PM
at lunch today he told me he is in the late 1950s right now

That explains it then, I had no idea the game could be played that long.

I don't actually know if there's even an end date.  Based on my first play through, you play out WW2, then surviving countries form new alliances and wage new wars.  Then you get WW3, then WW4, etc.  Actually after each war, not all losing counties disappear, they can survive and form new governments and alignments like what really happened after WW2.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on June 30, 2016, 06:36:29 PM
So last night, I was ridiculously pleased with myself for pulling off the encirclement below.

I bagged over 100 Soviet divisions. Then crushed them without mercy.

Serves Ivan right for declaring war on the Fatherland!

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 01, 2016, 02:46:24 AM
The official patch is live. Updates automatically on STEAM.
checksum: 5d33


https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/red-ball-express-1-1-patch-released-checksum-5d33.954195/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 01, 2016, 01:42:45 PM
It's to the point now where this forum is just about the only forum I can go to to get accurate information about how good or bad a game is. Bitching, whining, moaning and declaring games to be "unplayable "used to be the MO for a steam forum. Not anymore

When you have a game this complex there are going to be some issues with it, the AI is going to be doing some weird things on occasion and there will be mechanical things we don't understand yet.  Looking at the paradox forums -which are usually pretty tame- , there is just a ton of people complaining about every little thing in the game and declaring that they won't play.  The big reviews and even user reviews are overwhelmingly positive Though  which indicates that people who really care about the game and take the time love it .

" in my game France tried to invade Japan completely unrealistic the game is unplayable!"
" I had a naval battle bug where the battle lasted for one month the game is unplayable !
" in my game Germany started attacking neighbors and winning battles in 1937 there's no way the computer can do that without cheating. I'm never playing this game again !"

This is probably one of the most complex games out right now but anytime something goes wrong or there's a bug people lose their minds. I am glad looking through the last few pages here that I can get a good sense of what the game is like here.  I've been on the forum for a long time but I've always enjoyed that people here will give you a good rundown on what game is like.... not just throw temper tantrums
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 01, 2016, 02:01:43 PM
I think the overall vibe on the HOI4 Pdox forum is ridiculous -- extremely negative, like you say. I honestly don't get it. I've been with the series since the original HOI, and I had sky-high expectations for HOI4 leading up launch. My honest assessment is that the game does not disappoint. I'm completely enthralled by it, in fact.  The shortcomings are real and I'm not trying to diminish them -- the AI does need substantial work across the board. The balance for many of the major nations seems quite a bit off -- USSR too powerful, Japan not powerful enough, and so forth. Handling of naval and air combat, as ever, needs improvement. So yeah, there is still a lot of work to do on Pdox's part. But even so, the game just shines in my view. It's strong enough that it's enjoyable even in spite of all the problems -- problems which will start to get ironed out in time, with expansions and patches.

Maybe it's Pollyanna-ish of me, but I think HOI4 is a triumph, despite many legitimate criticisms.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 01, 2016, 02:39:58 PM
 Yeah, I can come onto this forum,read the reviews that members have written and get a really good idea of how the game is. Trying to go to paradox, steam or total war forums to get an idea about how a game is -at this point- is just an exercise in futility. All you read is people are longing for master of Orion 2 or Rome total war (which was a buggy mess when it first came out they forget.)

 Anyhow, back on topic. I'm just getting ready to start my first game....likely as  Germany. Have you guys found the new patch to be pretty good? Or should I wait a few more days for some hot fixes ?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 01, 2016, 02:40:57 PM
I think the overall vibe on the HOI4 Pdox forum is ridiculous -- extremely negative, like you say. I honestly don't get it. I've been with the series since the original HOI, and I had sky-high expectations for HOI4 leading up launch. My honest assessment is that the game does not disappoint. I'm completely enthralled by it, in fact.  The shortcomings are real and I'm not trying to diminish them -- the AI does need substantial work across the board. The balance for many of the major nations seems quite a bit off -- USSR too powerful, Japan not powerful enough, and so forth. Handling of naval and air combat, as ever, needs improvement. So yeah, there is still a lot of work to do on Pdox's part. But even so, the game just shines in my view. It's strong enough that it's enjoyable even in spite of all the problems -- problems which will start to get ironed out in time, with expansions and patches.

Maybe it's Pollyanna-ish of me, but I think HOI4 is a triumph, despite many legitimate criticisms.

+1 Well stated.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 01, 2016, 02:50:04 PM

 Anyhow, back on topic. I'm just getting ready to start my first game....likely as  Germany. Have you guys found the new patch to be pretty good? Or should I wait a few more days for some hot fixes ?

The patch is very stable and fixes the Enemy of my Enemy access bug that was blindly crippling before.  I don't think there'll be many fixes for the next little while as the devs have said the 1.1 patch was going out right before they were going on vacation, so you might as well get going with it now. 

Germany's a good starting game, as you can generally avoid the biggest AI messes by playing the Germans yourself.  Right now they offer what is probably the most complete and fully playable experience among the majors.

There are also a couple of good German equipment and music mods available that improve the immersion a lot.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on July 02, 2016, 12:03:10 PM
Hey gents  O0


So, I'm giving this game another shot. I got frustrated (mainly with my lack of knowledge and patience) and took a break from the game. I'm thinking of playing as either Italy or France and am going to do my best at taking my time and trying not to rush to the end  :crazy2:

I have a couple questions I hope someone can answer and I apologize if it's been asked here before (I really do not want to search through 49 pages of posts....although, I probably will have to at some point  ^-^)

When creating upgraded equipment like Infantry Weapons 2....how does one make sure his/her more experienced units get those new upgrades?
Can we do anything with the "older" equipment?

When creating a new division template, is it best to do it right away or wait a while? What's been your experience?

Lastly, how do you deploy your new divisions? Do you place them right on the front? Some safer province and train them up a bit before sending them to the front?

That's it for now. The rest I'll learn by doing and going over this thread.

Again, thanks to all who have contributed to this thread.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 02, 2016, 12:20:10 PM
Hey gents  O0


So, I'm giving this game another shot. I got frustrated (mainly with my lack of knowledge and patience) and took a break from the game. I'm thinking of playing as either Italy or France and am going to do my best at taking my time and trying not to rush to the end  :crazy2:

I have a couple questions I hope someone can answer and I apologize if it's been asked here before (I really do not want to search through 49 pages of posts....although, I probably will have to at some point  ^-^)

When creating upgraded equipment like Infantry Weapons 2....how does one make sure his/her more experienced units get those new upgrades?
Can we do anything with the "older" equipment?

When creating a new division template, is it best to do it right away or wait a while? What's been your experience?

Lastly, how do you deploy your new divisions? Do you place them right on the front? Some safer province and train them up a bit before sending them to the front?

That's it for now. The rest I'll learn by doing and going over this thread.

Again, thanks to all who have contributed to this thread.

1) I don't think there's any way to get the new equipment to more experienced units.  However, when you create a division template, you can set it to elite, regular, or cannon fodder (not sure about the names), and that controls the order they get new equipment in.

2) I don't create a template until I'm ready to use it.  I don't see any point in doing it any other way.  You might decide you have a better use for those XPs.  But you can create a template, make a couple of divisions under it, and then when you get more points edit it into a better template, edit your production plans so that no future units get built under the old template (e.g., if you are planning 4 infantry divisions under the old template and the 2nd one is being built now, cut back the order so it is now for only 2), and build subsequent units under the new template.

3) I don't fully understand what battle plans does with new units that get thrown into the hopper.  I see that -50 modifier on battle plans for units not in position, but still, I don't know any other way to incorporate a new division into an existing attack than to just add it to the army and add it to the army's battle plan.  For sure, in normal circumstances I would not keep new units out of the fray until they exercise their way up to regular.  That just takes too long.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: fabius on July 02, 2016, 02:33:30 PM

So, I'm giving this game another shot. I got frustrated (mainly with my lack of knowledge and patience) and took a break from the game. I'm thinking of playing as either Italy or France and am going to do my best at taking my time and trying not to rush to the end  :crazy2:


When creating upgraded equipment like Infantry Weapons 2....how does one make sure his/her more experienced units get those new upgrades?
Can we do anything with the "older" equipment?

Lastly, how do you deploy your new divisions? Do you place them right on the front? Some safer province and train them up a bit before sending them to the front?

1. You can set what equipment a division template gets. So I have 2 identical medium panzer templates. One is SS with best equipment; and other is regular army. You can copy a template at no cost by the way.
So I set my SS to get panthers before anybody else while I only have a few in stock coming of the lines.
Division template edit- click on tab at top "Division Equipment". You can then tick or untick what equipment that template can use.

2. Older equipment. At one point I had a second line infantry covering France using older equipment's. After that I lend lease my older equipment to allies or send to coups.

3. I create a training Army under a field marshal. Set deploy units to province and them direct to that army. They then train a bit before I'm ready to select them and right click them into new front line armies.
Teeth Divisions usually don't get full on map training to regular because I figure the training attrition may as well be in combat. Plus I need them.

Security suppression and garrison divisions stay training but in a working position on the map until regular.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 02, 2016, 02:51:05 PM

So, I'm giving this game another shot. I got frustrated (mainly with my lack of knowledge and patience) and took a break from the game. I'm thinking of playing as either Italy or France and am going to do my best at taking my time and trying not to rush to the end  :crazy2:


When creating upgraded equipment like Infantry Weapons 2....how does one make sure his/her more experienced units get those new upgrades?
Can we do anything with the "older" equipment?

Lastly, how do you deploy your new divisions? Do you place them right on the front? Some safer province and train them up a bit before sending them to the front?

1. You can set what equipment a division template gets. So I have 2 identical medium panzer templates. One is SS with best equipment; and other is regular army. You can copy a template at no cost by the way.
So I set my SS to get panthers before anybody else while I only have a few in stock coming of the lines.
Division template edit- click on tab at top "Division Equipment". You can then tick or untick what equipment that template can use.

2. Older equipment. At one point I had a second line infantry covering France using older equipment's. After that I lend lease my older equipment to allies or send to coups.

3. I create a training Army under a field marshal. Set deploy units to province and them direct to that army. They then train a bit before I'm ready to select them and right click them into new front line armies.
Teeth Divisions usually don't get full on map training to regular because I figure the training attrition may as well be in combat. Plus I need them.

Security suppression and garrison divisions stay training but in a working position on the map until regular.

Good response.  Where my response differs from this one, trust this one.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on July 03, 2016, 07:03:32 AM
Great tutorial about battleplans  (e.g. multiple plans on one front or having a number of plans executed in succession)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 03, 2016, 10:50:52 AM

I always think about Nazi Germany not  putting the economy on a war footing until 1942.  If the AI did that, people would be screaming for someone's head at Pdox.  How about taking all of your carriers, putting them in one giant "super-fleet", and attacking the largest US naval base in the Pacific?  Or how about invading the China with a relatively small army in 1937?  If the AI did any of those things, we would be calling it one of the worst AIs ever.

Agree 100%
"In my game, Germany was at war with Britain and the U.S. and fighting in North Africa, putting down threats in Yugoslavia and Greece as well as preparing for an inevitable cross-channel invasion. For no reason, Germany decided to invade the Soviet Union and is now fighting everywhere! Paradox!!! Please fix the AI so that it doesn't start new wars until the old ones are finished!"

Lol
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 03, 2016, 01:11:32 PM

I always think about Nazi Germany not  putting the economy on a war footing until 1942.  If the AI did that, people would be screaming for someone's head at Pdox.  How about taking all of your carriers, putting them in one giant "super-fleet", and attacking the largest US naval base in the Pacific?  Or how about invading the China with a relatively small army in 1937?  If the AI did any of those things, we would be calling it one of the worst AIs ever.

Agree 100%
"In my game, Germany was at war with Britain and the U.S. and fighting in North Africa, putting down threats in Yugoslavia and Greece as well as preparing for an inevitable cross-channel invasion. For no reason, Germany decided to invade the Soviet Union and is now fighting everywhere! Paradox!!! Please fix the AI so that it doesn't start new wars until the old ones are finished!"

Lol

While I see your point, there is certainly valid criticism on the weakness of the Axis AI.  It's one thing to compare the AI to the very dubious decisions that Hitler made in World War 2.  It's another when the AI fails to capture France by sending its armies against the Maginot line, and then decides to transfer 180 of its 200 divisions to the peaceful border with Russia and Ethiopia, allowing the British and French to take Berlin by mid 1940 (And this after Germany declared war on Sweeden, Mexico, Peru and the US).

There's going to be a marked improvement in how it does things after a few patches, but there are absolutely legit issues here when it comes to AI front priority, war justification logic and division spam.  Of course people will always complain regardless.   
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on July 03, 2016, 03:10:11 PM
There is a fine line that a human might catch and the AI might miss- how much is too much? Germany did launch Barbarossa while Britain was still standing and there was heavy fighting in the Med. It does sound like the AI was biting off too much in the given example. Hitler finished off the Balkans before he invaded Russia, historically. Having said that, though, the AI needs work.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 03, 2016, 03:56:59 PM
No, I understand what you're saying and although I have not put much time into this game, I have certainly played a lot of Europa universalis and Stellaris to understand the paradox AI. So,  I understand what you're saying. I guess my point is that lost in AI's poor decision-making are a lot of decisions which are possibly un-wise in retrospect, but not unrealistic. I think a lot of people on the paradox forums are categorizing unwise decisions as broken AI, when in reality unwise decisions were (and are) made all the time. But yes you are correct that the AI makes weird decisions at times...but I'm not sure that's ever correctable 100% in a game this complex.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 03, 2016, 04:50:46 PM
Just to be a little counter...

Read some of the strategies new- to mid-level players take on this and the Pdox forums...there is as much weirdness as any AI decisions being made.  The AI isn't perfect, there is no open-ended or sandbox game that has one.  But if you held human players to the same standard, you'd ind very few MP games.  I look at some of my games and more than a few times say either "why the hell did I do that?" or "I can't believe I forgot to do that".  The AI doesn't work from autosaves and get re-do's
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 03, 2016, 07:47:17 PM
Edit.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on July 04, 2016, 02:10:25 AM
There is a fine line that a human might catch and the AI might miss- how much is too much? Germany did launch Barbarossa while Britain was still standing and there was heavy fighting in the Med. It does sound like the AI was biting off too much in the given example. Hitler finished off the Balkans before he invaded Russia, historically. Having said that, though, the AI needs work.

I'm thinking a lot of the AI decisions are based on available resources.  AI Germany invades Russia because it needs the oil.  I guess that is also why Japan almost always attacks the Netherlands in the East.
Maybe Germany is also programmed to strike early before Russia becomes to strong and an invasion is no longer possible ?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 04, 2016, 08:29:24 AM
One thing I've seen which I'm not happy with is the Empty Homeland 'bug'.

I've seen the UK attempt to invade The Reich several times and always through the northern coast near Hamburg. A few months later, I invaded the UK and there was not a single UK unit there.

In my last game as the US, invaded Japan in 1946. One unit was guarding it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 04, 2016, 09:14:52 AM
Yeah, that's an issue..

Maybe amphibious invasions  are too easy in hearts of iron 4 and there needs to be a lot more involved so that you simply can't just hop across the channel.

I imagine that after the British expeditionary force landed in France in 1940 there was not a whole lot left in England had Germany invaded.... But Germany would have been completely incapable of invading in 1940 so I guess that's the point. Britain would've had plenty of notice that Germany was  planning an amphibious invasion. It requires air support, vast logistical supplies, depot build ups, heavy-lift harbor equipment and all sorts of things that you can't hide. There's a reason why the United States was really the only nation that conducted LARGE scale amphibious operations in World War II; They are logistically intense and difficult.  Only the Americans had the types of resources and logistical capabilities necessary.

Do you find that the AI does a good job of leaving forces behind against a land-based adversary sharing the border? For example: does Germany keep forces IN Germany if it's off fighting the Soviets but is fighting France?

So is the problem that and  amphibious invasions are simply too easy into common instead of the nation not leaving forces behind?  Maybe the solution would be to increased the cost of invasion somehow instead of writing something that forces the AI to keep a huge chunk of its forces behind?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 04, 2016, 10:10:32 AM
Yeah, that's an issue..

Maybe amphibious invasions  are too easy in hearts of iron 4 and there needs to be a lot more involved so that you simply can't just hop across the channel.

I think they ramped-up Amphib for HOI4. That's great, because there's more action now in that area.  Amphib on steroids for the Pacific - I have no problem with this.  Europe though, needs work. Even they have to script-in some changes, they need to adjust the AI for certain theatres if they want to keep some historical feel to it.

Quote
Do you find that the AI does a good job of weeding forces behind against a land-based adversary sharing the border? For example: does Germany keep forces IN Germany if it's off fighting the Soviets but is fighting France?

I'm not sure. I've played two long games so far and not had a chance to investigate certain things. Playing Ironman mode does not allow you to peek at other nations. I will check it though.


Great tutorial about battleplans  (e.g. multiple plans on one front or having a number of plans executed in succession)

Excellent vid. A few things I didn't know and are really useful.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on July 04, 2016, 12:26:49 PM
Maybe the solution would be to increased the "cost quote open Debbie is beige and somehow instead of writing something that forces the AII to keep a huge chunk of its forces behind?

Could you explain what you meant there ?

I haven't encountered 'the empty homeland' bug in my games so far.

A solution could be to increase the value of your homeland VP's so they are more valuable then the VP you conquered.  This could encourage the AI to protect their homeland VP's.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 04, 2016, 12:35:29 PM

Do you find that the AI does a good job of weeding forces behind against a land-based adversary sharing the border? For example: does Germany keep forces IN Germany if it's off fighting the Soviets but is fighting France?



This the heart of one of the two biggest problems the game has, front priority.  It looks like the AI considers all fronts equal and gets confused when fighting multiple enemies in multiple places. 

Example I mentioned before in my Japan game where Germany sent more than 2/3 of its army to garrison the Russian front, abandoning its front in France and allowing the French to take Berlin. 

When I loaded up the game from the German perspective, I noticed that Germany was sending huge numbers of troops back and forth on Strategic redeployment,  including a large amount via naval transfer to Ethopia.

Another distinctly rough example was my UK game.  France held the Germans off again, but when Japan invaded Indochina, they abandoned the Maginot line and their entire front to transfer virtually the whole French Army via naval transport to the Far East.  Humorously enough, Germany had its entire army fighting in Ethopia and against Sweeden in Denmark, so the French/German front just went quiet until Belgium decided to walk almost unopposed into Berlin. 

Italy also gets itself in a lot of trouble with using naval transport through the English Channel to try to put troops on the Eastern Front.  In my last Germany game the Italians lost almost a million men to sending their un-escorted Transports through the British navy.  I eventually handled this by, sadly, invading undefended Britain with 8 Paratrooper divisions and forcing their capitulation.

The good news is that this mostly effects the Axis, and can somewhat be reduced by playing AS the Axis.    There are also some modders that are trying to come up with a fix before the PD Dev team comes back from vacation.  As it is, I think it should be something that's not hard to patch.  The behavior seems to be very replicatable, and really it should be something that can be handled by just forcing the AI to consider active fronts neighboring core provinces to be more important.

Interestingly enough, two countries that do not suffer from this problem are the US and China.  They fiercely defend their core provinces.   This is why, so far, the most interesting game I've had was my Japan game in the invasion of China phase.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 04, 2016, 01:25:54 PM
Maybe the solution would be to increased the "cost quote open Debbie is beige and somehow instead of writing something that forces the AII to keep a huge chunk of its forces behind?

Could you explain what you meant there ?

I haven't encountered 'the empty homeland' bug in my games so far.

A solution could be to increase the value of your homeland VP's so they are more valuable then the VP you conquered.  This could encourage the AI to protect their homeland VP's.

Explain? Yes.  It's called the "iPhone text talk fail "

Should say "makes invasions more costly"
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 04, 2016, 02:15:58 PM
One thing I've seen which I'm not happy with is the Empty Homeland 'bug'.

I've seen the UK attempt to invade The Reich several times and always through the northern coast near Hamburg. A few months later, I invaded the UK and there was not a single UK unit there.

In my last game as the US, invaded Japan in 1946. One unit was guarding it.


I take some of this back.

Started a 1939 game as The Reich, and tried Sea Lion and the UK just kicked my ass. Don't know exactly what happened here, but the UK had garrisoned units on the coast, and their navy ripped the hell out of my forces, even though I was sure I'd bombed most of them. I got Air Superiority but they just sank half my invasion force and are now kicking them back on the coastlines. Hmm...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 04, 2016, 02:40:02 PM
One thing I've seen which I'm not happy with is the Empty Homeland 'bug'.

I've seen the UK attempt to invade The Reich several times and always through the northern coast near Hamburg. A few months later, I invaded the UK and there was not a single UK unit there.

In my last game as the US, invaded Japan in 1946. One unit was guarding it.


I take some of this back.

Started a 1939 game as The Reich, and tried Sea Lion and the UK just kicked my ass. Don't know exactly what happened here, but the UK had garrisoned units on the coast, and their navy ripped the hell out of my forces, even though I was sure I'd bombed most of them. I got Air Superiority but they just sank half my invasion force and are now kicking them back on the coastlines. Hmm...

The difference might be the '39 scenario.  I admit to having never done a '39 start.  Maybe I'll try a US '39 game today.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 05, 2016, 02:17:13 AM
Quote
After vacation we will be working on 1.2 patch or 1.1.1 if a hotfix is needed. AI and balance will be priority but we also have some nice ideas for increasing difficulty and replayability and such for players who have already mastered the game. More info on that in august.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-development-diary-1st-of-july-2016.954528/



The difference might be the '39 scenario.  I admit to having never done a '39 start.  Maybe I'll try a US '39 game today.

For now I think '39 is just the ticket.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 05, 2016, 09:27:21 AM
Question.....playing USA, it's August 1940 and the world is at war but I've yet to become a part of it.  I suspect that is about to change.  I have no handle on the number of military and naval factories I should have. Currently I have 25 military and 27 naval.  Am I woefully under in numbers? What has been your experience with this?  Thanks, Ray
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on July 05, 2016, 09:49:27 AM
Question.....playing USA, it's August 1940 and the world is at war but I've yet to become a part of it.  I suspect that is about to change.  I have no handle on the number of military and naval factories I should have. Currently I have 25 military and 27 naval.  Am I woefully under in numbers? What has been your experience with this?  Thanks, Ray

I have the same question, but more about number of divisions, both land and naval. I've never played as the USA before. Its 1941, the world is at war and Japan just started justifying a war goal against me. I've created Eastern, Western, Southern and Caribbean Commands, as well as independent Marine and Airborne forces, but I probably only have about 60 divisions total.

I've tried transporting Marine divisions from the west coast of the US to the Hawaiian Islands, but it won't let me for some reason, even thought the current position and the destination both have large naval facilities. I have a feeling I am going to get my a$$ totally handed to me. I have no idea what I'm doing when it comes to command of naval forces since all my past experience has been with Germany where I never focus on the naval war.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 05, 2016, 12:53:11 PM
Hmm, that's strange. If you have a unit selected that's in a province with a port, and right-click on an overseas province that has a port, it should automatically embark, using transports from the 'pool' that's indicated on the topmost UI bar...  If you're USA I can't imagine you don't have sufficient transports -- you are likely swimming in them.

Did you try right-clicking directly on the port, rather than the province it's in? Not sure if that makes a difference (just spitballing from my office at work : ) ).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 05, 2016, 12:59:08 PM
Also, HOI4 AI unfortunately (as in games past) seems to follow the naval doctrine of "Combine all your ships into a single superfleet, reality be damned."  That means if you try to follow US doctrine, for ex., early war doctrine stipulated only one fleet carrier per task force, your precious carriers are likely to get annihilated by the roving Japanese super-fleet(s). It also means doing things like adding multiple battleships to your carrier task forces, again, not something USN generally did in the early war with its slow battlewagons -- and really I think didn't even do later in the war with the faster battleships, except possibly as anti-aircraft platforms?  Regardless, Japanese AI will throw CVs, BBs, subs, you name it into single large fleets.  It's immersion killing and something I really hope Pdox will try to improve.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 05, 2016, 01:35:51 PM
Hmm, that's strange. If you have a unit selected that's in a province with a port, and right-click on an overseas province that has a port, it should automatically embark, using transports from the 'pool' that's indicated on the topmost UI bar...  If you're USA I can't imagine you don't have sufficient transports -- you are likely swimming in them.

Did you try right-clicking directly on the port, rather than the province it's in? Not sure if that makes a difference (just spitballing from my office at work : ) ).

Sandman is correct....I was initially frustrated in getting marines to Hawaii but it was because they weren't in port province. When moved into one it was easy to get them there....and yes, sometimes I had to click on the Hawaii port icon itself yet other times it worked just clicking on open land.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on July 05, 2016, 01:55:08 PM
I've tried both methods...clicking on land and clicking on the port. I'll double check to make sure the current location is definitely a port, rather than a naval construction facility.

Its a 10 division army I am trying to move...is it possible that it is too large a unit to move at once?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 05, 2016, 02:03:57 PM
Definitely check the province window in the lower left to confirm the port is in that exact province.

10 divisions sounds like a lot and it may be in that case that you don't have enough free transports in your pool -- although as USA you likely are not using a lot of transports for trade b/c you already have most of the natural resources you need, but trade (or accepting lend-lease, also not applicable in this case) can eat up transport capacity. You might just try transporting one or 2 divs at a time and see if that works.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 05, 2016, 02:32:53 PM
Also, HOI4 AI unfortunately (as in games past) seems to follow the naval doctrine of "Combine all your ships into a single superfleet, reality be damned."  That means if you try to follow US doctrine, for ex., early war doctrine stipulated only one fleet carrier per task force, your precious carriers are likely to get annihilated by the roving Japanese super-fleet(s). It also means doing things like adding multiple battleships to your carrier task forces, again, not something USN generally did in the early war with its slow battlewagons -- and really I think didn't even do later in the war with the faster battleships, except possibly as anti-aircraft platforms?  Regardless, Japanese AI will throw CVs, BBs, subs, you name it into single large fleets.  It's immersion killing and something I really hope Pdox will try to improve.

Didn't the Japanese actually do just that for both Pearl Harbor and Midway?  Especially at Midway, if you consider all the pieces in play at the same time, except the diversion force.  The Japanese seemed to tend to consolidate their carriers into 1 large fleet with a few in port.  I thought the 3rd fleet late in the war contained all carriers that were operational.

In fact, didn't the large US carrier fleets do the same thing late in the war.  A lot of carriers and BBs in the same fleet.  I'm not saying the AI is doing the right things, but the "super fleet" isn't far from reality at a strategic level, I thought.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 05, 2016, 04:03:19 PM
I've tried both methods...clicking on land and clicking on the port. I'll double check to make sure the current location is definitely a port, rather than a naval construction facility.

Its a 10 division army I am trying to move...is it possible that it is too large a unit to move at once?

You can also use the battle planner to move an army via sea transport.  Select the divisions you want to send and give them a fallback location on the overseas province you want them to move to.  They should automatically embark and disembark. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 05, 2016, 05:31:40 PM
Also, HOI4 AI unfortunately (as in games past) seems to follow the naval doctrine of "Combine all your ships into a single superfleet, reality be damned."  That means if you try to follow US doctrine, for ex., early war doctrine stipulated only one fleet carrier per task force, your precious carriers are likely to get annihilated by the roving Japanese super-fleet(s). It also means doing things like adding multiple battleships to your carrier task forces, again, not something USN generally did in the early war with its slow battlewagons -- and really I think didn't even do later in the war with the faster battleships, except possibly as anti-aircraft platforms?  Regardless, Japanese AI will throw CVs, BBs, subs, you name it into single large fleets.  It's immersion killing and something I really hope Pdox will try to improve.

Didn't the Japanese actually do just that for both Pearl Harbor and Midway?  Especially at Midway, if you consider all the pieces in play at the same time, except the diversion force.  The Japanese seemed to tend to consolidate their carriers into 1 large fleet with a few in port.  I thought the 3rd fleet late in the war contained all carriers that were operational.

In fact, didn't the large US carrier fleets do the same thing late in the war.  A lot of carriers and BBs in the same fleet.  I'm not saying the AI is doing the right things, but the "super fleet" isn't far from reality at a strategic level, I thought.

 That's what I had thought. I can't speak to what was the initial task force model at the beginning of the war but I believe that at "coral sea" in April May 1942 there were three carriers in the US task force. Of course, at midway the US had three carriers as well.  At Leyte gulf I believe the Naval task force there had a  significant number of battleships; they were, at that point, predominantly used for anti-air defense but they were still there nevertheless.

I would be surprised if there was a naval engagement involving any carriers during World War II in which the United States came with less than 3 carriers and less than a half dozen battleships.
 I'm not an expert  and I am talking by memory...but I would think it would be unrealistic if i there was a US Navy task force cruising around with just one carrier??

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 05, 2016, 05:33:21 PM
Actually, the USN did that quite a bit early in the war.  They were doing a lot of hit & run raids.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on July 05, 2016, 05:49:27 PM
I've tried both methods...clicking on land and clicking on the port. I'll double check to make sure the current location is definitely a port, rather than a naval construction facility.

Its a 10 division army I am trying to move...is it possible that it is too large a unit to move at once?

There should be an indicator on how much transports are needed to move the units.
Select units.  Place mouse on selected destination port.  Then wait for the tooltip to come out.  It will say how many convoys are needed.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 05, 2016, 06:04:33 PM
Actually, the USN did that quite a bit early in the war.  They were doing a lot of hit & run raids.

 Well I can't speak to raids as I don't know much about it but I know there were no major naval engagements where one side brought only one carrier. I was incorrect previously; at coral sea, both sides had two carriers. The earlier battles like coral sea and midway did not see battleships on the U.S. Side ....presumably most of them had been sunk. I did have the ship order of battle for the US at Leyte Gulf. This was the 3rd and 7th fleets  totaling 300 ships.

I don't know whether the game is realistic or not but I certainly think it's realistic to have multiple carriers in fleets of 100 or so.  I suspect there were not a lot of battleships in the US fleet for the first year or so because we simply did not have any. Again, I'm not an expert on the stuff and I could be talking out of my arse.

~300 ships in total[1]
8 fleet carriers
8 light carriers
18 escort carriers
12 battleships
24 cruisers
166 destroyers and destroyer escorts
Many PT boats, submarines, and fleet auxiliaries
About 1,500 planes

I also looked at the Battle off of Guadacanal. A smaller battle but it seems the U.S. put Battleships in with Carriers at times.US OOB.

1 carrier
2 battleships
2 heavy cruisers
3 light cruisers
12 destroy
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on July 05, 2016, 06:29:08 PM
Well, my WWII Databook arrived today. Wow. Just wow. I'm going to sleep with it and have like 100 of its babies. Its awesome.

Thanks for the recommendation!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 05, 2016, 06:37:45 PM
I'm no expert on WW2 naval warfare either and don't mean to mislead -- what I wrote was from memory based on reading, so imperfect certainly, and probably too influenced by GG's War in the Pacific AE. "One CV per TF" was putting it too categorically -- but I'm pretty sure that early war USN doctrine favored smallrt, flexible TFs built around 1 (or 2) fleet carriers. This grew as the war progressed. But I think WITP means to simulate this by having an air-strike coordination penalty for USN early in the war -- so if you load 4 CVs into a single TF in '42, you're actually penalizing yourself *as the US player* -- you'll actually dissipate your air-strike potential, not maximize it.  Things are quite the opposite for the IJN player, since as has been pointed out, IJN certainly did put together large TFs for the large scale strikes against Pearl - the 'Kido Butai' - and Midway. The TF for Midway was enormous taken as a whole, although I think it was parcelled out in ways that meant the whole 'main body' was not in proximity at any one time -- i.e. Yamamoto's flagship Yamato was nowhere near Nagumo's carrier strike fleet when disaster struck -- the battleships were kept separate from the CVs, even though in a broad sense they were part of the same strike force.

So yes, it would be realistic if in HOI4, in the early Pacific war anyway, USN assembled smaller carrier TFs, and IJN assembled larger TFs. Still, even by this measure, the HOI4 AI puts together insane fleets: 80 destroyers, 6 carriers, 7 battleships, plus subs etc. And as US player, if you don't do the same, your fleets will get completely wiped out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 05, 2016, 06:48:16 PM
I have a copy open of John Ellis' World War II Databook (US: https://www.amazon.com/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  if you don't own one, order one right now. You won't be disappointed).

I overlooked this earlier -- now I want this too!
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 05, 2016, 08:14:20 PM
I'm no expert on WW2 naval warfare either and don't mean to mislead -- what I wrote was from memory based on reading, so imperfect certainly, and probably too influenced by GG's War in the Pacific AE. "One CV per TF" was putting it too categorically -- but I'm pretty sure that early war USN doctrine favored smallrt, flexible TFs built around 1 (or 2) fleet carriers. This grew as the war progressed. But I think WITP means to simulate this by having an air-strike coordination penalty for USN early in the war -- so if you load 4 CVs into a single TF in '42, you're actually penalizing yourself *as the US player* -- you'll actually dissipate your air-strike potential, not maximize it.  Things are quite the opposite for the IJN player, since as has been pointed out, IJN certainly did put together large TFs for the large scale strikes against Pearl - the 'Kido Butai' - and Midway. The TF for Midway was enormous taken as a whole, although I think it was parcelled out in ways that meant the whole 'main body' was not in proximity at any one time -- i.e. Yamamoto's flagship Yamato was nowhere near Nagumo's carrier strike fleet when disaster struck -- the battleships were kept separate from the CVs, even though in a broad sense they were part of the same strike force.

So yes, it would be realistic if in HOI4, in the early Pacific war anyway, USN assembled smaller carrier TFs, and IJN assembled larger TFs. Still, even by this measure, the HOI4 AI puts together insane fleets: 80 destroyers, 6 carriers, 7 battleships, plus subs etc. And as US player, if you don't do the same, your fleets will get completely wiped out.

I don't know, but don't let it kill your IMMERSION!! Lol.

Stacks-of-doom suck but what your describing doesn't seem TOO bad...

I guess what I'm saying is that in your game, you are trying to utilize one fleet model but the Japnese are utilizing another with superior numbers and winning.  In order to avoid getting your butt whipped, you have to create your own super-fleet....but isn't that what happened in the Pacific from jan 42- late 1943? The U.S. Increases TF size?


Please tell me though that the AI is at least using "combined arms" in its fleet composition though? It's not deploying a TF consisting of 9 carriers and 10 battleships or some such! I hope it includes large numbers of cruisers, destroyers and subs.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 05, 2016, 11:15:08 PM
Considering the ocean region sizes, I actually think "doom fleets" sort of make sense. 

I mean, look at the ridiculously large OOB's for battles like Leyte Gulf, or in WW1 Jutland, and it's pretty understandable why massing forces seems to be the best course of action. 

The issue comes in that scenarios like Midway don't really occur, where a much smaller, but better led and luckier force beat a "doom stack".

Of course, if a Midway like result happened in HoI4 people on the Paradox forum would scream about it. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on July 06, 2016, 12:08:04 AM
Does the AI actually suffer from their affinity to doom fleets?  Meaning other sea areas are left defenceless.  Maybe that's the problem.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on July 06, 2016, 12:14:39 AM
Considering the ocean region sizes, I actually think "doom fleets" sort of make sense. 

I mean, look at the ridiculously large OOB's for battles like Leyte Gulf, or in WW1 Jutland, and it's pretty understandable why massing forces seems to be the best course of action. 

The issue comes in that scenarios like Midway don't really occur, where a much smaller, but better led and luckier force beat a "doom stack".

Of course, if a Midway like result happened in HoI4 people on the Paradox forum would scream about it.

Not a universally known historical fact, but Midway wasn't really the long shot it's made out to be in some of the earlier English-language books on the topic.  The US had a significant numerical advantage in planes after you toss in the Midway group, and one of their four airfields was unsinkable if easy to find.  The qualitative advantages that the Japanese enjoyed were also somewhat exaggerated (e.g., the IJN had better carrier-based fighters and torpedo-bombers, while the USN had better reconnaissance capabilities and far superior damage control protocols).

The real-world problem with doom stacks tends to be logistical, I think.  The US was able to overcome that in the Pacific starting in 1944, but it took an absurd amount of logistical effort that only the US was able to muster.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 06, 2016, 02:34:28 AM
Well, my WWII Databook arrived today. Wow. Just wow. I'm going to sleep with it and have like 100 of its babies. Its awesome.

Thanks for the recommendation!

You're welcome. I don't publicly recommend anything unless it's overwhelmingly great. In this case, it's a book any WW2 historian/strategy gamer can't be without.

I overlooked this earlier -- now I want this too!

I think you will find it essential for recreating historical OOB and more.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 06, 2016, 04:54:35 AM
I am no fanboi of HOI4 AI.  I mean, the challenge of HOI4 is the complexity, not the AI.  But I really hate to see this forum turn into the Pdox forums where its like people are just waiting for the AI to do something stupid so they can complain about it, without even looking at what happened historically.  I see the AI making a lot of little mistakes that I say to myself, "I would never do that".  Its pretty easy, if you play and replay the same set ups over and over again, to beat the AI.  And, to me, that is the main issue with any AI.  It becomes predictable.  HOI4 seems no different.  But on a first run through of a set up, I find the AI at least as competent as I am, maybe more so.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on July 06, 2016, 08:56:45 AM
Speaking as a total grand strategy noob and Paradox noob, I find this game intolerably infuriating and I've shelved it possibly forever

But that is more on me than the game  :uglystupid2:

But, once again, I'd like to thank everyone who posted on this thread. I'd like to say it helped me, but it didn't (on me, not all of you)  :crazy2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on July 06, 2016, 09:00:37 AM
I have a copy open of John Ellis' World War II Databook (US: https://www.amazon.com/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/World-War-II-Data-Book/dp/1854102540  if you don't own one, order one right now. You won't be disappointed).

I overlooked this earlier -- now I want this too!

Count me in too
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 06, 2016, 09:40:44 AM
I am no fanboi of HOI4 AI.  I mean, the challenge of HOI4 is the complexity, not the AI.  But I really hate to see this forum turn into the Pdox forums where its like people are just waiting for the AI to do something stupid so they can complain about it, without even looking at what happened historically.  I see the AI making a lot of little mistakes that I say to myself, "I would never do that".  Its pretty easy, if you play and replay the same set ups over and over again, to beat the AI.  And, to me, that is the main issue with any AI.  It becomes predictable.  HOI4 seems no different.  But on a first run through of a set up, I find the AI at least as competent as I am, maybe more so.

 I don't see much of that on this forum really. In fact, I post here exclusively just for that reason: that people tend to give reasonable opinions about games and have reasonable complaints...I find anyway.

I can't imagine a more complex game then HOI 4. With the amount of things the AI is required to do for each nation, it's surprising to me that it is as good as it is.

At the battle of Chancellorsville (American Civil War) Confederate general Lee divided his smaller army of 65,000 in the face of a larger Union army of over 100k. The next day, Lee again divided one of the parts of his (already divided) army in the face of an opposing larger force. It worked out and Lee was victorious. Considered his greatest victory. Lee won because the Union general (Hooker) froze. Hooker failed to attack through the hole left in Lee's lines and refused to commit 3 unused Corps in a counter attack.

Had the Union general been AI controlled, people would complain it is brain dead and "the AI did nothing as I flanked it...it just sat there in a line".  Had Hooker attacked and split Lee's line between the holding force and flanking force, Lee would have been ridiculed for splitting his army 2x in the face of a superior force. If Lee was AI controlled, people would claim "The AI can't even concentrate forces...March a force behind it, the AI freaks out and splits its force, then sends parts all over the place. Why can't it just keep an army together".

Some AI moves in games are a result of bad AI or bugs and whatnot. All AI decisions are results of algorithms; but to me, it's not immersion killing when an AI makes a stupid move since REAL people do it...so long as it is "reasonably stupid" and coherent.  Marching Lines of Battle back and forth while under fire in Empire Total war being an example.

However, attacking one country and leaving a border with another enemy completely undefended is a problem....as is repeated (failed) amphibious landings in the same spot. I'm not an apologist for bad AI...just asking that people consider that human generals have made dumb decisions.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 06, 2016, 09:43:22 AM
Speaking as a total grand strategy noob and Paradox noob, I find this game intolerably infuriating and I've shelved it possibly forever

But that is more on me than the game  :uglystupid2:

But, once again, I'd like to thank everyone who posted on this thread. I'd like to say it helped me, but it didn't (on me, not all of you)  :crazy2:

Maybe you should start with EU IV? Same game engine but depending on the time period, fewer mechanics to worry about and less stuff happening. Or maybe Crudader Kings2? Another Clauswitz engine game.

You gave it a shot but if your new to grand strategy, HOI 4 seems like a tough one to start with
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 06, 2016, 11:02:28 AM
"However, attacking one country and leaving a border with another enemy completely undefended is a problem"...Maginot Line anyone?

Oddly, I have only played as the US and never had the amphib assault issue.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 06, 2016, 11:03:59 AM
I don't see much of that on this forum really. In fact, I post here exclusively just for that reason: that people tend to give reasonable opinions about games and have reasonable complaints...I find anyway.

Couldn't agree more. I think the conversation around HOI4 in this thread has been really insightful and productive -- critical on some points, certainly, but not without backing said criticisms up with well-reasoned claims, as mikeck says.


With the amount of things the AI is required to do for each nation, it's surprising to me that it is as good as it is.

Again, in complete agreement. The more I've gotten to know HOI4 -- and I've literally played *nothing* else since it released! -- the more impressed I am by what Pdox has pulled off here. The fact that they were willing to produce a game as complex and historically detailed as HOI4 speaks volumes about what they value. Like any smart company, Pdox has attempted (successfully) to broaden its audience over the years -- and they have done so without sacrificing depth, complexity, and attention to historical detail. I think it's extraordinary, really. The widespread complains on the Pdox forums about how HOI4 is 'dumbed down'... I just don't know what planet those folks live on.

Pdox has created a global-scale, real-time strategic simulation of the greatest conflict in history, and done it in a way meant to appeal to a broad audience *without* sacrificing important historical detail for players more knowledgeable about WW2. If that isn't some trifecta that pulls off a seemingly impossible stunt, I don't know what is.

I'm not an apologist for bad AI...just asking that people consider that human generals have made dumb decisions.

It's like you're reading my mind, man --  8)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on July 06, 2016, 11:54:48 AM
Is it perfect ?  I hope not (I already paid for the 2 next expansions  ;))

Is it fun ?  I spend more time on it last month than I ever did on HOI3, so I would say yes.

While you are playing this is a good book (part 1 of 3) to read about the strategy and tactics but also the economic, political, and social aspects of WWII :  The War in the West - A New History - Part I : 1939-1941
https://www.amazon.com/War-West-History-Ascendant-1939-1941-ebook/dp/B00XGX9GIU/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1467826892&sr=1-1&keywords=war+in+the+west#navbar



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 06, 2016, 12:18:01 PM
I know I "complain" a lot about the AI, but I hope it's understood that my criticism is meant to be constructive, and is in part seeing if the things I have happen are replicated often for other players.  My genuine hope is that bringing attention to the places where the AI is not working as designed so that they can be addressed in the (hopefully near) future. 

I wouldn't waste my time mentioning anything if I didn't like the game.  And I've already eaten my crow about my initial opinion that the game was "dumbed down". 

The AI is actually making logical decisions as far as it knows.  When it sees an undefended costal provinces, it goes for it.  When the fascists run low on trade options and WT gets high enough, the AI declares war on any place that has resources it needs, it just doesn't get it's unable or impossible to get to them.  It does its best to defend every front it's fighting on, and goes for the front that has the most weight of potentially hostile units, even if that front is Ethopia or Burma.  It prioritizes going to the conscription law that gives the country the most manpower, and then uses that manpower to spam as many divisions as it can. 

All the above things are issues that are going on under the hood, and they're fixable and I have confidence they will be fixed.  What's great is that the game is actually fun, even with some of these problems.  I've also found that most of these issues are less in the '39 scenario, primarily because the AI has less time at peace to make setup mistakes.  Keeping these things in the light are going to make them get resolved faster for the people that have the issue.

The Paradox forums constantly haranguing the devs over not having these things fixed at release is tiring, annoying and one reason I very rarely post there.   I am by trade a historian, not a game designer, but I can only imagine how hard putting a game like this together must be.  Heck, I did Historicity Beta on the first two games, so I absolutely had some insight into how these games looked prior to their release and what PD had to do just to get them ready for release. 

I think the discussion over here has been pretty solid all around.  And as for in game generalship, I make von Manstein look like Fredenhall.   8)

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 06, 2016, 12:56:02 PM
Some AI moves in games are a result of bad AI or bugs and whatnot. All AI decisions are results of algorithms; but to me, it's not immersion killing when an AI makes a stupid move since REAL people do it...so long as it is "reasonably stupid" and coherent. 

"Reasonably stupid" is brilliant, by the way. I think you're absolutely right there's an important distinction to make between 'dumb AI moves' that are plausible, and ones that are completely implausible.

The reality that even good generals sometimes made stupid mistakes is, to me, one of the strong arguments in favor of using the Battle Planner, and for taking as 'hands off' approach as you can to HOI's battles. Draw up the operation, then leave it to your generals - i.e. the AI - to achieve the objectives. This has one benefit of leveling the playing field and making for a more challenging game. It's your plan, but in another sense it's AI vs. AI, both handicapped by the same shortcomings.

I don't get a whole lot of joy from micromanaging. This is the main reason I used HOI3's 'army AI control' feature, which was the prototype for the more advanced Battle planner in HOI4. HOI3's AI army control was definitely clumsier and harder to use well than HOI4's. But I like the idea that not everything is in my control -- I think it makes for a far more interesting game.

I overall love HOI4's Battle Planner but do think it needs to be refined. I find myself sometimes intensely micromanaging how an army's front contracts or expands depending on what territories are being seized and when. Sometimes an army's front expands in rather ridiculous fashion, which then completely throws off how the AI positions the units and how it approaches reaching the goals you set out initially. Not sure how Pdox is going to fix that -- it seems like a 'baked in' problem to how they designed the battle planner -- but I do hope they improve it.



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on July 06, 2016, 01:00:04 PM
I've also found that most of these issues are less in the '39 scenario, primarily because the AI has less time at peace to make setup mistakes.

This is exactly my thinking in starting up a USA '39 campaign last night. I always started in '36 in HOI3, always. Am curious to see if things play out in a little more historical fashion.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 06, 2016, 01:19:27 PM
"Reasonably stupid"...I agree this is a brilliant term.  And there is the opposite for cheating AIs...unreasonably intelligent.  The definition of that would be SkyNet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 06, 2016, 07:42:04 PM
Yes, there's much brilliance in this game.  Especially as somebody who likes to play at the U.S., the pre-war part of building up the U.S. is just absolutely brilliant, way better than it was done before.

And yes, criticisms of the AI should rightfully take into account how incredibly difficult it is to pull of such a multi-pronged AI . . . but . . . still . . . in the long run, this game MUST have better AI or people just aren't going to keep playing.  As has always been true with HOI, the AI just isn't good enough.  That's where they have to concentrate on the patches, not on adding new packages of options.  It's the AI.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: MetalDog on July 06, 2016, 08:10:54 PM
Speaking as a total grand strategy noob and Paradox noob, I find this game intolerably infuriating and I've shelved it possibly forever

But that is more on me than the game  :uglystupid2:

But, once again, I'd like to thank everyone who posted on this thread. I'd like to say it helped me, but it didn't (on me, not all of you)  :crazy2:


If you'll take it, I have two pieces of advice:

1)  If you think you like grand strategy games, keep trying them until one clicks

and

2)  Go into the game trying not to focus on everything.  There is a LOT of stuff to do in any grand strategy game.  Pick a few aspects you want to focus on and press Start and let the chips fall where they may.  And when you get tired or frustrated, start a new game and incorporate what you've learned in to the new play.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 06, 2016, 08:16:53 PM
Yeah, but people need to be realistic about it.  I really don't want patching resources spent on trying to make a perfect AI.  A reasonable one?...sure.  But listening to people complain about the every aspect of the AI, especially claiming its doing unrealistic things, when its not necessarily unreasonable based on history, will not help.

The problem I see, even on this board, is general claims of the AI doing this or that, without any context whatsoever.  This is a very complex game and throwing out a general statement about too many amphibious landings without some details won't help get anything fixed.  How about year, alliances, enemies, national focus, aggressiveness, production, research, etc.  I am still not familiar with HOI4 enough to even know...can a save be posted so others can see settings?

I also think a big factor is people who played a lot of HOI2/3 coming and knowing just enough to be dangerous in HOI4.  They are assuming HOI4 is less of a game than its predecessors or the AI is broken.

And I, now and then, pull out an old Command HQ example from my days playing in Windows 3.1.  I used to play it to death and beat the AI a lot, but got killed a couple times when the AI loaded up a huge armada and attacked me through Africa up into Europe.  It was the first MP game I had ever owned and I got so pissed off at the game and AI that I convinced my buddy at work to hook up our PCs through serial ports and play against me.  In our first game, guess what he did?  Built a huge armada and attacked me through Africa.  He cleaned my clock.  When I asked him why he chose that strategy, he said he wanted to do something unconventional.  I gained a little more respect for the AI on that simple game.

My point is that when people demand an AI be fixed, I think they sometimes lose sight of the fact that you wouldn't want an AI that is perfect.  There are times that an AI is broken and needs fixing, but sometimes its a game mechanic that is actually broken.  For example, the marching through another country's territory bug.  That to me is actually a game play bug that manifested itself as a perceived AI bug.  In HOI4, I have yet to run into anything that makes me throw my hands up in the air and declare, "I can't believe the AI did that, no human would ever do that."  I have seen human players in Combat Mission and other players do some really stupid things.

Maybe as people play it more they become jaded because they can see patterns in AI play.  But I think if people had to play scenarios clean and not be allowed to replay them the AI would appear to be a much better opponent.  The one all encompassing fault with AIs right now is that they don't learn from replaying a scenario.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 06, 2016, 09:46:05 PM
  In HOI4, I have yet to run into anything that makes me throw my hands up in the air and declare, "I can't believe the AI did that, no human would ever do that."  I have seen human players in Combat Mission and other players do some really stupid things.


To each his own.  But I really, honestly, and not thinking myself a superior player at all find this so brutally hard to believe that it borders on hyperbole or makes me think that somehow you are playing a state of the game, so absolutely and fundamentally different from the one that I have, that it has to be something akin to a different game. 

But, then again who knows?  I'm just honestly and genuinely stunned at that feeling.  It really does make me wonder if there's more going on and wrong under the hood, perhaps operating in different ways for different people that some of the issues aren't as transparent as they seem. 

I don't, having an only barely rudimentary understanding of how the coding works understand how that works.  Especially considering Podcat has admitted that the AI doesn't understand concepts of encirclement and swiftness yet, and has very deep issues with front priority.  I just don't know.

I accept that you haven't had issues.  I would just ask you to accept that perhaps the issues that others have might have been real too.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on July 06, 2016, 10:47:02 PM
Yeah, but people need to be realistic about it.  I really don't want patching resources spent on trying to make a perfect AI.  A reasonable one?...sure.  But listening to people complain about the every aspect of the AI, especially claiming its doing unrealistic things, when its not necessarily unreasonable based on history, will not help.

The problem I see, even on this board, is general claims of the AI doing this or that, without any context whatsoever.  This is a very complex game and throwing out a general statement about too many amphibious landings without some details won't help get anything fixed.  How about year, alliances, enemies, national focus, aggressiveness, production, research, etc.  I am still not familiar with HOI4 enough to even know...can a save be posted so others can see settings?

I also think a big factor is people who played a lot of HOI2/3 coming and knowing just enough to be dangerous in HOI4.  They are assuming HOI4 is less of a game than its predecessors or the AI is broken.

And I, now and then, pull out an old Command HQ example from my days playing in Windows 3.1.  I used to play it to death and beat the AI a lot, but got killed a couple times when the AI loaded up a huge armada and attacked me through Africa up into Europe.  It was the first MP game I had ever owned and I got so pissed off at the game and AI that I convinced my buddy at work to hook up our PCs through serial ports and play against me.  In our first game, guess what he did?  Built a huge armada and attacked me through Africa.  He cleaned my clock.  When I asked him why he chose that strategy, he said he wanted to do something unconventional.  I gained a little more respect for the AI on that simple game.

My point is that when people demand an AI be fixed, I think they sometimes lose sight of the fact that you wouldn't want an AI that is perfect.  There are times that an AI is broken and needs fixing, but sometimes its a game mechanic that is actually broken.  For example, the marching through another country's territory bug.  That to me is actually a game play bug that manifested itself as a perceived AI bug.  In HOI4, I have yet to run into anything that makes me throw my hands up in the air and declare, "I can't believe the AI did that, no human would ever do that."  I have seen human players in Combat Mission and other players do some really stupid things.

Maybe as people play it more they become jaded because they can see patterns in AI play.  But I think if people had to play scenarios clean and not be allowed to replay them the AI would appear to be a much better opponent.  The one all encompassing fault with AIs right now is that they don't learn from replaying a scenario.

I think the AI is fairly decent, but it has some serious problems. From my own experience it has problems deciding which front is the most serious threat. Playing as the Soviets, I saw the German AI not leave a single division on its front with me for over a year. I could have driven to Berlin in a week, but I help myself back. It eventually saw the threat, but this was no designed behavior. Later in the game, the AI left one division to defend Japan.

It will be fixed, I am confident.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 07, 2016, 09:20:30 AM
Yeah, that's a pretty legitimate AI concern. Leaving a land border with a potential adversary completely undefended. I her having to alter my plans to "help" the AI but sometimes you have to. In my current Stellaris game, I'm in the "steamroll" phase. No AI empire could keep up from the start...so, I helped them
By gifting them "research agreements and ridiculous anounts of minerals.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on July 07, 2016, 12:12:07 PM
What I want to see is human players being able to provide detailed advice to allies via the battle planner tools. That would probably be the easiest way to fix the AI in the near and medium term.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 07, 2016, 03:16:14 PM
If anyone wants to see what the AI does exactly, bring up the console window and type observe to see the AI run your nation. Also checking the 'see allies warplans' will provide greater insight.


http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Console_commands
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 07, 2016, 06:00:20 PM
I have been using that method for quite a while to learn the game.  For a week, I let the AI go at by itself and watched what it did.  It is actually very fascinating.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 07, 2016, 11:11:03 PM
If anyone wants to see what the AI does exactly, bring up the console window and type observe to see the AI run your nation. Also checking the 'see allies warplans' will provide greater insight.


http://www.hoi4wiki.com/Console_commands

Very much so. 

Try switching around to different countries with this feature enabled as well.  This is how I saw Germany constantly keeping over 2/3 of its army in constant confused back and forth strategic redeployment between the active western and inactive/at peace Eastern front.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 09, 2016, 07:56:41 PM
When building aircraft when there is no 'need' to fill a deficiency a symbol comes up on the build screen saying they are being put into reserves. Where do I access these reserves to get them assigned to air bases?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 09, 2016, 08:41:44 PM
When building aircraft when there is no 'need' to fill a deficiency a symbol comes up on the build screen saying they are being put into reserves. Where do I access these reserves to get them assigned to air bases?

Select any airbase, preferably an empty one.  There should be a create new squadron button blinking at the top of the airbase screen.  Simply deploy a brand new squadron from your reserves, make it however large you like.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 10, 2016, 01:00:47 AM
Playing as the Americans, the Germans attacked France early, but I threw 20 divisions and about 1000 planes over there and blunted their attack. They were stopped in the low countries, and never crossed the Maginot line. I was all intertangled with the French and the Brits.

Suddenly, France capitulated. I wasn't really paying attention to the rear areas around Paris, but I'm pretty sure there were no Germans there. Anyway, it was a pretty big surprise but at least  nobody hit me from behind through France after the capitulation, and I was able to throw up a hook line so that I had a defensive line facing France and still had the low countries.  The Brits, Dutch and Belgians were still there fighting alongside me. It was a little touch and go and the Germans got halfway through Netherlands and the Dutch capitulated. I had to march a few divisions over there to help out after that happened, but the situation stabilized and we had a really solid U-shaped line, with me holding the Southern front and the northwest front and the Belgians the short eastern line and a little of the northern line. I did one limited offensive into Northern France, and successfully pushed the Germans back a bit to grab a port and the big airfield at Calais, which I quickly filled up with planes. The Maginot line and the line in the Netherlands were both really stout, Belgium and the West part of the Netherlands including the port at Rotterdam were safe as houses and I had massive air superiority and a second offensive planned to take Paris with both my corps planning lights lit up green. This was early '42.

And then Belgium capitulated, under no threat at all. Not only that, but the Belgian divisions that had been holding part of the Netherlands and Maginot Line fronts all were suddenly enemy! My 8 divisions I had sent to shore up the Netherlands were completely cut off and no longer connected to a port, and the two corps that were ready to jump off to Paris suddenly had 10 enemy divisions on a broad front in their rear and nothing at all to stop the whole German army from pouring into the gap before I could attack those divisions and seal the hole again.

Is this WAD? Man, that was RAW.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 10, 2016, 05:45:47 AM
When building aircraft when there is no 'need' to fill a deficiency a symbol comes up on the build screen saying they are being put into reserves. Where do I access these reserves to get them assigned to air bases?

Select any airbase, preferably an empty one.  There should be a create new squadron button blinking at the top of the airbase screen.  Simply deploy a brand new squadron from your reserves, make it however large you like.

Thanks...!  I'm getting old. I think I may have asked this before but had forgotten the answer. This game has quite a lot of depth to it, I struggle trying to remember all the little details.  :-\
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 10, 2016, 10:39:57 AM
Playing as the Americans, the Germans attacked France early, but I threw 20 divisions and about 1000 planes over there and blunted their attack. They were stopped in the low countries, and never crossed the Maginot line. I was all intertangled with the French and the Brits.

Suddenly, France capitulated. I wasn't really paying attention to the rear areas around Paris, but I'm pretty sure there were no Germans there. Anyway, it was a pretty big surprise but at least  nobody hit me from behind through France after the capitulation, and I was able to throw up a hook line so that I had a defensive line facing France and still had the low countries.  The Brits, Dutch and Belgians were still there fighting alongside me. It was a little touch and go and the Germans got halfway through Netherlands and the Dutch capitulated. I had to march a few divisions over there to help out after that happened, but the situation stabilized and we had a really solid U-shaped line, with me holding the Southern front and the northwest front and the Belgians the short eastern line and a little of the northern line. I did one limited offensive into Northern France, and successfully pushed the Germans back a bit to grab a port and the big airfield at Calais, which I quickly filled up with planes. The Maginot line and the line in the Netherlands were both really stout, Belgium and the West part of the Netherlands including the port at Rotterdam were safe as houses and I had massive air superiority and a second offensive planned to take Paris with both my corps planning lights lit up green. This was early '42.

And then Belgium capitulated, under no threat at all. Not only that, but the Belgian divisions that had been holding part of the Netherlands and Maginot Line fronts all were suddenly enemy! My 8 divisions I had sent to shore up the Netherlands were completely cut off and no longer connected to a port, and the two corps that were ready to jump off to Paris suddenly had 10 enemy divisions on a broad front in their rear and nothing at all to stop the whole German army from pouring into the gap before I could attack those divisions and seal the hole again.

Is this WAD? Man, that was RAW.

 I mean in reality the country could certainly capitulate if the leader felt the nation was being destroyed and it wasn't worth it... Or that it was a losing cause ....but man, I'm really surprised at the French capitulation. If your final line was going through Belgium and there was a lot of fighting there, I could see why Belgium would capitulate but for France to capitulate when there's no threat to Paris I don't see that.

 It's easy to justify that decision by saying that no European country except for Germany and Britain really had the stomach for war in 1940. They were all still reeling from World War I. But I think that's leading the game off the hook. I don't know what factors go into a nation capitulating don't really have a problem with the Belgium one but France capitulating makes me scratch my head
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on July 10, 2016, 10:57:09 AM
I like the game pretty well.  I find myself savoring the action more than I did with HoI III. 

The grand strategic AI seems better than III as well (but still far from perfect...I have seen the IV AI do some really "dumb" things). 

I do wish they would return to HoI II's function that let you control your allies however.  The AI still does not seem to be a competent ally. 

Of course, plenty of room for improvement.  It would be easy for me to list out a bunch of stuff that I don't like.  But the list of what I do like is much longer. :)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: mikeck on July 10, 2016, 11:20:15 AM
In too many other games, total war in particular, your allies will join the war but they won't send substantial forces to help you out or send them where you need them. from what  i'm reading on this thread, at least they send forces to help out in the fighting. It's the same with Stellaris; they will send  substantial forces  to help you.

Along those lines are you alone able to coordinate targets with the AI? You can and some games so you both go after the same city or enemy army etc.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 10, 2016, 11:28:04 AM
Playing as the Americans, the Germans attacked France early, but I threw 20 divisions and about 1000 planes over there and blunted their attack. They were stopped in the low countries, and never crossed the Maginot line. I was all intertangled with the French and the Brits.

Suddenly, France capitulated. I wasn't really paying attention to the rear areas around Paris, but I'm pretty sure there were no Germans there. Anyway, it was a pretty big surprise but at least  nobody hit me from behind through France after the capitulation, and I was able to throw up a hook line so that I had a defensive line facing France and still had the low countries.  The Brits, Dutch and Belgians were still there fighting alongside me. It was a little touch and go and the Germans got halfway through Netherlands and the Dutch capitulated. I had to march a few divisions over there to help out after that happened, but the situation stabilized and we had a really solid U-shaped line, with me holding the Southern front and the northwest front and the Belgians the short eastern line and a little of the northern line. I did one limited offensive into Northern France, and successfully pushed the Germans back a bit to grab a port and the big airfield at Calais, which I quickly filled up with planes. The Maginot line and the line in the Netherlands were both really stout, Belgium and the West part of the Netherlands including the port at Rotterdam were safe as houses and I had massive air superiority and a second offensive planned to take Paris with both my corps planning lights lit up green. This was early '42.

And then Belgium capitulated, under no threat at all. Not only that, but the Belgian divisions that had been holding part of the Netherlands and Maginot Line fronts all were suddenly enemy! My 8 divisions I had sent to shore up the Netherlands were completely cut off and no longer connected to a port, and the two corps that were ready to jump off to Paris suddenly had 10 enemy divisions on a broad front in their rear and nothing at all to stop the whole German army from pouring into the gap before I could attack those divisions and seal the hole again.

Is this WAD? Man, that was RAW.

 I mean in reality the country could certainly capitulate if the leader felt the nation was being destroyed and it wasn't worth it... Or that it was a losing cause ....but man, I'm really surprised at the French capitulation. If your final line was going through Belgium and there was a lot of fighting there, I could see why Belgium would capitulate but for France to capitulate when there's no threat to Paris I don't see that.

 It's easy to justify that decision by saying that no European country except for Germany and Britain really had the stomach for war in 1940. They were all still reeling from World War I. But I think that's leading the game off the hook. I don't know what factors go into a nation capitulating don't really have a problem with the Belgium one but France capitulating makes me scratch my head

Oh no, when Belgium capitulated there was either NO fighting in Belgium or, if any, the Germans had pushed a few miles west on a narrow front on the northern part of their border with Belgium.  Generally, though, the northern line ran through Holland, the southern line ran through France, and most of the eastern line was still on the border.  Other than that one little area down there, where the Germans weren't really pushing and didn't have much to push with, Belgium didn't even have enemy troops on the border ANYWHERE. 

But the worst part was that their divisions suddenly went enemy and were right in my rear.  It really sucked.  My entire expeditionary force, which was in a very solid position and pushing back more than it got pushed, got surrounded and eaten.   :'(
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 10, 2016, 12:31:00 PM
Playing as the Americans, the Germans attacked France early, but I threw 20 divisions and about 1000 planes over there and blunted their attack. They were stopped in the low countries, and never crossed the Maginot line. I was all intertangled with the French and the Brits.

Suddenly, France capitulated. I wasn't really paying attention to the rear areas around Paris, but I'm pretty sure there were no Germans there. Anyway, it was a pretty big surprise but at least  nobody hit me from behind through France after the capitulation, and I was able to throw up a hook line so that I had a defensive line facing France and still had the low countries.  The Brits, Dutch and Belgians were still there fighting alongside me. It was a little touch and go and the Germans got halfway through Netherlands and the Dutch capitulated. I had to march a few divisions over there to help out after that happened, but the situation stabilized and we had a really solid U-shaped line, with me holding the Southern front and the northwest front and the Belgians the short eastern line and a little of the northern line. I did one limited offensive into Northern France, and successfully pushed the Germans back a bit to grab a port and the big airfield at Calais, which I quickly filled up with planes. The Maginot line and the line in the Netherlands were both really stout, Belgium and the West part of the Netherlands including the port at Rotterdam were safe as houses and I had massive air superiority and a second offensive planned to take Paris with both my corps planning lights lit up green. This was early '42.

And then Belgium capitulated, under no threat at all. Not only that, but the Belgian divisions that had been holding part of the Netherlands and Maginot Line fronts all were suddenly enemy! My 8 divisions I had sent to shore up the Netherlands were completely cut off and no longer connected to a port, and the two corps that were ready to jump off to Paris suddenly had 10 enemy divisions on a broad front in their rear and nothing at all to stop the whole German army from pouring into the gap before I could attack those divisions and seal the hole again.

Is this WAD? Man, that was RAW.

That's really odd.  The only thing I can think of that might cause this would be some kind of peace conference oddity.  Did the Belgians completely capitulate, or did they get puppeted?  What kind of government do they have, if any? 

If the war started early, are you sure Germany started it?  If France took the early confrontation route they would take a huge hit to national unity, and that could be the reason for their easy capitulation.

Thus far the only way I've seen anyone switch sides with their forces intact is if they get puppetted or liberated via a peace conference.  This would be weird if Belgium was in the Allies.  Did France join the Allies or go Little Entente?  If they went the Entente route they would've been their own faction, that Belgium could've been a part of, and then switched sides to Axis via the peace treaty.

Countries switching sides is of course valid historically, see Italy as just one case, so it wouldn't surprise me if this was somehow WAD.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 10, 2016, 01:53:36 PM
Playing as the Americans, the Germans attacked France early, but I threw 20 divisions and about 1000 planes over there and blunted their attack. They were stopped in the low countries, and never crossed the Maginot line. I was all intertangled with the French and the Brits.

Suddenly, France capitulated. I wasn't really paying attention to the rear areas around Paris, but I'm pretty sure there were no Germans there. Anyway, it was a pretty big surprise but at least  nobody hit me from behind through France after the capitulation, and I was able to throw up a hook line so that I had a defensive line facing France and still had the low countries.  The Brits, Dutch and Belgians were still there fighting alongside me. It was a little touch and go and the Germans got halfway through Netherlands and the Dutch capitulated. I had to march a few divisions over there to help out after that happened, but the situation stabilized and we had a really solid U-shaped line, with me holding the Southern front and the northwest front and the Belgians the short eastern line and a little of the northern line. I did one limited offensive into Northern France, and successfully pushed the Germans back a bit to grab a port and the big airfield at Calais, which I quickly filled up with planes. The Maginot line and the line in the Netherlands were both really stout, Belgium and the West part of the Netherlands including the port at Rotterdam were safe as houses and I had massive air superiority and a second offensive planned to take Paris with both my corps planning lights lit up green. This was early '42.

And then Belgium capitulated, under no threat at all. Not only that, but the Belgian divisions that had been holding part of the Netherlands and Maginot Line fronts all were suddenly enemy! My 8 divisions I had sent to shore up the Netherlands were completely cut off and no longer connected to a port, and the two corps that were ready to jump off to Paris suddenly had 10 enemy divisions on a broad front in their rear and nothing at all to stop the whole German army from pouring into the gap before I could attack those divisions and seal the hole again.

Is this WAD? Man, that was RAW.

That's really odd.  The only thing I can think of that might cause this would be some kind of peace conference oddity.  Did the Belgians completely capitulate, or did they get puppeted?  What kind of government do they have, if any? 

If the war started early, are you sure Germany started it?  If France took the early confrontation route they would take a huge hit to national unity, and that could be the reason for their easy capitulation.

Thus far the only way I've seen anyone switch sides with their forces intact is if they get puppetted or liberated via a peace conference.  This would be weird if Belgium was in the Allies.  Did France join the Allies or go Little Entente?  If they went the Entente route they would've been their own faction, that Belgium could've been a part of, and then switched sides to Axis via the peace treaty.

Countries switching sides is of course valid historically, see Italy as just one case, so it wouldn't surprise me if this was somehow WAD.

Good questions.  I'll answer the ones I can.  I quit the game after my crap got swallowed and, sadly, chose that moment to do a rare saved-game purge.  :idiot2:

The announcement was Belgium capitulated.  I'm pretty sure the new enemies that showed up in my rear where they had been were German units, as if the Belgians somehow became Germans.  They were inside our prior line.

I'm pretty sure the war started the regular way, through Poland.  I know I have standard historical choices turned on in the preferences, and I don't recall anything weird happening.  I just joined the Allies early and came over - war had already started, and I wasn't eyeballing the area that closely before I got there.  But I think I would have noticed if somebody had declared on a peaceful Germany.

I would assume historical choices meant France didn't create its own alliances.  I know the Brits were there fighting in the Low Countries (as were the Swiss!) and the normal brit allies were in the coalition.

I was wondering if those countries are just pre-set to surrender to Germany at a certain point.  Even if they're winning.  I was really looking forward to see what an unconquered France would look like as an ally.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 10, 2016, 02:31:49 PM

Good questions.  I'll answer the ones I can.  I quit the game after my crap got swallowed and, sadly, chose that moment to do a rare saved-game purge.  :idiot2:

The announcement was Belgium capitulated.  I'm pretty sure the new enemies that showed up in my rear where they had been were German units, as if the Belgians somehow became Germans.  They were inside our prior line.

I'm pretty sure the war started the regular way, through Poland.  I know I have standard historical choices turned on in the preferences, and I don't recall anything weird happening.  I just joined the Allies early and came over - war had already started, and I wasn't eyeballing the area that closely before I got there.  But I think I would have noticed if somebody had declared on a peaceful Germany.

I would assume historical choices meant France didn't create its own alliances.  I know the Brits were there fighting in the Low Countries (as were the Swiss!) and the normal brit allies were in the coalition.

I was wondering if those countries are just pre-set to surrender to Germany at a certain point.  Even if they're winning.  I was really looking forward to see what an unconquered France would look like as an ally.

That makes it even more odd.  I misunderstood that you just had an early entry as the US rather than the war had a pre-39 start.  One of the scenarios that can, but often does not, occur is France forming its own faction and going to war over the Sudetenland.  That scenario would be far more likely to result in what you described than the historical Danzig or War path.

The low countries won't capitulate, as far as I have seen, in any sort of automatic way.  I've seen the Belgians take Berlin, and more than a few times the Netherlands and Belgium survive the entire war as well as France.   In fact, in my experience, unless playing an Axis power, France and the low countries have only fallen in one game, and that was in the '39 scenario.  So they can and many times will survive.

Perhaps they were being influenced by Germany and had a pro-fascist coup?  I've never seen the Germans do that, and am not sure it's even possible in the engine, but it seems to be the only real way that it would work.  With France and Belgium both in the Allies, there shouldn't have been a peace conference to flip loyalties until the UK capitulated, as they're the Allies leader. 

I'm not sure the Axis AI would care if a country was Fascist anyway.  I've seen Germany outrace its national focuses with war justifications and declare war on friendly Fascist Hungary, Romania and Nationalist Spain several times.  It typically isn't in a rush to invite anyone into the faction except Italy and Japan.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on July 10, 2016, 04:03:30 PM

Good questions.  I'll answer the ones I can.  I quit the game after my crap got swallowed and, sadly, chose that moment to do a rare saved-game purge.  :idiot2:

The announcement was Belgium capitulated.  I'm pretty sure the new enemies that showed up in my rear where they had been were German units, as if the Belgians somehow became Germans.  They were inside our prior line.

I'm pretty sure the war started the regular way, through Poland.  I know I have standard historical choices turned on in the preferences, and I don't recall anything weird happening.  I just joined the Allies early and came over - war had already started, and I wasn't eyeballing the area that closely before I got there.  But I think I would have noticed if somebody had declared on a peaceful Germany.

I would assume historical choices meant France didn't create its own alliances.  I know the Brits were there fighting in the Low Countries (as were the Swiss!) and the normal brit allies were in the coalition.

I was wondering if those countries are just pre-set to surrender to Germany at a certain point.  Even if they're winning.  I was really looking forward to see what an unconquered France would look like as an ally.

That makes it even more odd.  I misunderstood that you just had an early entry as the US rather than the war had a pre-39 start.  One of the scenarios that can, but often does not, occur is France forming its own faction and going to war over the Sudetenland.  That scenario would be far more likely to result in what you described than the historical Danzig or War path.

The low countries won't capitulate, as far as I have seen, in any sort of automatic way.  I've seen the Belgians take Berlin, and more than a few times the Netherlands and Belgium survive the entire war as well as France.   In fact, in my experience, unless playing an Axis power, France and the low countries have only fallen in one game, and that was in the '39 scenario.  So they can and many times will survive.

Perhaps they were being influenced by Germany and had a pro-fascist coup?  I've never seen the Germans do that, and am not sure it's even possible in the engine, but it seems to be the only real way that it would work.  With France and Belgium both in the Allies, there shouldn't have been a peace conference to flip loyalties until the UK capitulated, as they're the Allies leader. 

I'm not sure the Axis AI would care if a country was Fascist anyway.  I've seen Germany outrace its national focuses with war justifications and declare war on friendly Fascist Hungary, Romania and Nationalist Spain several times.  It typically isn't in a rush to invite anyone into the faction except Italy and Japan.

I'm kind of thinking it's a bug, but I'm playing as the US again, and I passed up the chance to intervene early in this game.  I'm curious, but not a glutton for punishment.  That was brutal.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: RyanE on July 10, 2016, 05:35:04 PM
I'm kind of thinking before its declared a bug,you need to observe what the AI was doing.  Too bad you don't have the save files...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 11, 2016, 03:59:24 AM
Along those lines are you alone able to coordinate targets with the AI? You can and some games so you both go after the same city or enemy army etc.

Yes, check the 'see Allied War Plans' box, bottom right of the screen. You can use it to plan ahead so when they launch you are with them.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on July 11, 2016, 06:58:45 AM
Along those lines are you alone able to coordinate targets with the AI? You can and some games so you both go after the same city or enemy army etc.

Yes, check the 'see AI War Plans' box, bottom right of the screen. You can use it to plan ahead so when they launch you are with them.

It amazes me that even after many, many hours of play this game still has layers of depth I haven't realized were there.  Thanks to Ian, Pete and others for pointing them out.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 11, 2016, 08:19:38 AM

It amazes me that even after many, many hours of play this game still has layers of depth I haven't realized were there.  Thanks to Ian, Pete and others for pointing them out.

You're welcome. I meant 'see Allied War Plans' BTW -original post amended.

Yes, the game has things I never discovered for some time...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 12, 2016, 06:59:32 AM
Here's another tip:

How To Modify Your Unit In The Field

This is a great way to set specific divisions in the field to reserve divisions, stripped-down versions, bolstered or heavy versions.


1. Open the Division Designer and select the existing Division Template of the specific type of Division you want to change in the field.

Here, we are going to change the Italian 1st Infantry Division from a front--line status, to a reserve (with less priority for upgrades and equipment).

Duplicate the Infantry Template and rename it.

Change it to a reserve division.


(http://img07.deviantart.net/cfe1/i/2016/194/8/5/1_by_jack_o_tales-da9ttmm.jpg)









2. Go back to your unit and click on it's icon

(http://orig05.deviantart.net/88f4/f/2016/194/c/9/2_by_jack_o_tales-da9ttmb.jpg)





3. In the Unit Details window, click on the Change Division Template icon, and change it to your new reserve Infantry Division template. Notice that the unit neither loses nor gains equipment or experience and it becomes a reserve division.


This method can be used to modify specific units in a very customised way, for example, if you send some of your Armoured Divisions to the North African Deserts and you want to simply add Logistics Companies to them, while the rest of your Armour remains in Europe without those companies.


(http://orig13.deviantart.net/c25b/f/2016/194/e/8/3_by_jack_o_tales-da9ttm1.jpg)



Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on July 13, 2016, 07:00:06 AM
Question ...playing as Italy in early 1940 we (the axis) got France to capitulate however there are still regions that show as France owned in France. I thought if a country capitulates it gives up all holdings?

FYI between this and the most recent Stellaris patch almost all of my time is being taken up. Still would like more control of somethings Stellaris but both games are accessible and fun.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on July 13, 2016, 07:07:00 AM
Question ...playing as Italy in early 1940 we (the axis) got France to capitulate however there are still regions that show as France owned in France. I thought if a country capitulates it gives up all holdings?

FYI between this and the most recent Stellaris patch almost all of my time is being taken up. Still would like more control of somethings Stellaris but both games are accessible and fun.

Sounds like Germany may have taken the Vichy option. This creates a new French state in the west, but it should be allied with and controlled by the Axis.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on July 13, 2016, 01:00:16 PM
Here's another mod worth checking out, until the Scandinavians return from their vacation to fix things. It fixes the desert issues in Africa.

"This mod creates areas that are impassable. It should make the game more historical in terms of who fought where, but also stop the AI letting their divisions bleed to death in low infra areas. "

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=699397350



(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/270593642739748249/6089E9B2136666DC8F781B4E09749EBD412D1A5B/?interpolation=lanczos-none&output-format=jpeg&output-quality=95&fit=inside|637:358&composite-to=*,*|637:358&background-color=black)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on July 13, 2016, 08:54:04 PM
Question ...playing as Italy in early 1940 we (the axis) got France to capitulate however there are still regions that show as France owned in France. I thought if a country capitulates it gives up all holdings?

FYI between this and the most recent Stellaris patch almost all of my time is being taken up. Still would like more control of somethings Stellaris but both games are accessible and fun.

Is the war over and you had a peace conference? Or is it still ongoing?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on July 14, 2016, 06:14:55 AM
Question ...playing as Italy in early 1940 we (the axis) got France to capitulate however there are still regions that show as France owned in France. I thought if a country capitulates it gives up all holdings?

FYI between this and the most recent Stellaris patch almost all of my time is being taken up. Still would like more control of somethings Stellaris but both games are accessible and fun.

Is the war over and you had a peace conference? Or is it still ongoing?
good question... I do not think there was a peace treaty, just a message that France capitulated.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: SirAndrewD on July 14, 2016, 12:34:30 PM
Question ...playing as Italy in early 1940 we (the axis) got France to capitulate however there are still regions that show as France owned in France. I thought if a country capitulates it gives up all holdings?

FYI between this and the most recent Stellaris patch almost all of my time is being taken up. Still would like more control of somethings Stellaris but both games are accessible and fun.

Sounds like Germany may have taken the Vichy option. This creates a new French state in the west, but it should be allied with and controlled by the Axis.

It's also worth noting that in the current version of the game, France retains all of its colonial holdings after its capitulation.  Not sure this is WAD as historically Vichy should inherit much of those. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Electric_Strawberry on July 17, 2016, 05:30:47 PM
I'm just starting to get into HOI IV and I've learned a lot from this thread.  I know that several of you have a well deserved aversion to the Paradox forum, but I found this there.  It's been quite helpful: 

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/air-mechanics-combat-mission-quick-guide.947290/

There is also this:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzLOehWwWQepZ3dKU2M2amxGbE0/view
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on August 10, 2016, 07:28:55 AM
Can you stop the Zombie Horde?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on October 15, 2016, 04:40:22 AM
Saw this announcement about future expansion, seems like people concerned the blitz command is paid feature....not sure how I feel about it, on the surface since an extension to orders, seems like maybe that should be free, but likely doesn't matter to me since I would probably pick up the expansions anyway:)

****************************

Hi everyone! Today I will start talking about features coming in the future expansion (still not announced yet, so its name shall remain under fog of war). First up are things related to battle plans and managing unit orders

Paid Feature: Blitz Command
The Offensive Lines in battle plans are designed to expand as a front expands and you take territory. This works fine if what you want to do is push along a broad front, but not as well when you are trying to have several orders in the same area active at once or doing encirclements or more detailed things. As long as such are a couple of provinces microing some armored divisions to do it is no big hurdle, but for bigger stuff that becomes a lot of work. So, to improve on this we are adding another tool to the battle plan toolbox for you to use: Blitz Command. A blitz command works differently in that when you activate it it remembers the area you tell it to take and will do that without readjusting its width or caring about other things getting in its way. Perfect for drawing pincer movements and encirclements!

We have also worked on the AIís ability to identify encirclements and choke points, so even though it's easier to plan an encirclement now actually successfully pulling them off will be more difficult.

Free Feature: Configurable Garrison Order
The Garrison order has gotten some love and you can now configure what you want it to guard and care about. So if you only care about ports and coastlines you can select only ports and coastlines for the order. It will also help you a bit and count up how many divisions are at least needed so that it can place one on each spot according to your order.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on October 15, 2016, 07:39:55 AM
Paid Feature: Blitz Command
The Offensive Lines in battle plans are designed to expand as a front expands and you take territory. This works fine if what you want to do is push along a broad front, but not as well when you are trying to have several orders in the same area active at once or doing encirclements or more detailed things. As long as such are a couple of provinces microing some armored divisions to do it is no big hurdle, but for bigger stuff that becomes a lot of work. So, to improve on this we are adding another tool to the battle plan toolbox for you to use: Blitz Command. A blitz command works differently in that when you activate it it remembers the area you tell it to take and will do that without readjusting its width or caring about other things getting in its way. Perfect for drawing pincer movements and encirclements!

We have also worked on the AIís ability to identify encirclements and choke points, so even though it's easier to plan an encirclement now actually successfully pulling them off will be more difficult.


I generally have no problem with Pdox's DLC policies, but something this essential really should be a free feature, not a paid one.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on October 15, 2016, 08:19:32 AM
Paid Feature: Blitz Command
The Offensive Lines in battle plans are designed to expand as a front expands and you take territory. This works fine if what you want to do is push along a broad front, but not as well when you are trying to have several orders in the same area active at once or doing encirclements or more detailed things. As long as such are a couple of provinces microing some armored divisions to do it is no big hurdle, but for bigger stuff that becomes a lot of work. So, to improve on this we are adding another tool to the battle plan toolbox for you to use: Blitz Command. A blitz command works differently in that when you activate it it remembers the area you tell it to take and will do that without readjusting its width or caring about other things getting in its way. Perfect for drawing pincer movements and encirclements!

We have also worked on the AIís ability to identify encirclements and choke points, so even though it's easier to plan an encirclement now actually successfully pulling them off will be more difficult.


I generally have no problem with Pdox's DLC policies, but something this essential really should be a free feature, not a paid one.

Agreed. Perhaps this is just one feature/addition among others that will be part of this DLC?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Grim.Reaper on October 15, 2016, 08:21:55 AM
Paid Feature: Blitz Command
The Offensive Lines in battle plans are designed to expand as a front expands and you take territory. This works fine if what you want to do is push along a broad front, but not as well when you are trying to have several orders in the same area active at once or doing encirclements or more detailed things. As long as such are a couple of provinces microing some armored divisions to do it is no big hurdle, but for bigger stuff that becomes a lot of work. So, to improve on this we are adding another tool to the battle plan toolbox for you to use: Blitz Command. A blitz command works differently in that when you activate it it remembers the area you tell it to take and will do that without readjusting its width or caring about other things getting in its way. Perfect for drawing pincer movements and encirclements!

We have also worked on the AIís ability to identify encirclements and choke points, so even though it's easier to plan an encirclement now actually successfully pulling them off will be more difficult.


I generally have no problem with Pdox's DLC policies, but something this essential really should be a free feature, not a paid one.

Agreed. Perhaps this is just one feature/addition among others that will be part of this DLC?

yes, this is just one of them, they are just starting to disclose them...but still think this likely should be part of the "FREE" patch even if other features included.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on October 15, 2016, 09:31:40 AM
I'm staying clear of the game. I will admit, I gave up. I tried (put in 30+ hours or so) but it was just too much of a struggle for me. A developer can charge whatever they want for a feature but we have the choice, with our wallets, to disagree.

Kudos to those of you that plowed ahead with this game and had fun!  O0
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on October 15, 2016, 01:50:30 PM
Any feature they will be adding whether it is good or bad, paid or free, will not interest me if the AI and many mechanisms are not working well as WW2 game. I am now certain this game is not for me, and I am glad for people who is enjoying it, I think paradox did a good job overall for attracting many gamers to their newer titles.
I will stuck with the other plenty amazing WW2 strategy games there.
Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: solops on October 15, 2016, 03:43:36 PM
Yeah, I have had a lot of questions about this HOI4. I have all of the other HOI titles and DLC, as well as spin-offs "Darkest Hour" and "Arsenal of Democracy." I am wondering if "World War II Europe 1939-1945" (which I have) or "Strategic Command WWII: War in Europe" might be better. Does anyone know anything about Strategic Command WWII: War in Europe?
Assuming they can debug these games, it all seems to come down to the AI.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Raied on October 15, 2016, 10:01:59 PM
I am eagerly waiting for Strategic Command, the focus on Europe however, but even if the AI is not good at least it has Slitherine PBEM system for multiplayer.
I do not like to play Paradox games multiplayer due to the fact you have to be online with your opponent(s) at the same time, so AI in paradox games is very important (and of course how the game is designed for that).
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on November 01, 2016, 12:15:20 PM
First HOI4 expansion -- "Together for Victory" -- announced:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/ (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/)

Gotta say, this doesn't exactly blow me away. "New National Focus trees" for Commonwealth nations seems to be the big selling point here - ? Really?

I mean, who cares about the UK and Commonwealth? We all know 'Murica won the war, with a minor assist from the Russkis  (*ducks and runs out of room*)   ;)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on November 01, 2016, 12:56:12 PM
First HOI4 expansion -- "Together for Victory" -- announced:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/ (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/)

Gotta say, this doesn't exactly blow me away. "New National Focus trees" for Commonwealth nations seems to be the big selling point here - ? Really?

I mean, who cares about the UK and Commonwealth? We all know 'Murica won the war, with a minor assist from the Russkis  (*ducks and runs out of room*)   ;)

Well besides that bit of revisionist history :D this was my major concern with HoI4... That they would nickle and dime the foci.

The AI I understand is a work in progress but the diplomacy and cloak and dagger aspects need a ton of work IMO and that's what I'm looking for in a dlc.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on November 01, 2016, 02:43:51 PM
First HOI4 expansion -- "Together for Victory" -- announced:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/ (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/)

Gotta say, this doesn't exactly blow me away. "New National Focus trees" for Commonwealth nations seems to be the big selling point here - ? Really?

I mean, who cares about the UK and Commonwealth? We all know 'Murica won the war, with a minor assist from the Russkis  (*ducks and runs out of room*)   ;)

Well besides that bit of revisionist history :D this was my major concern with HoI4... That they would nickle and dime the foci.

The AI I understand is a work in progress but the diplomacy and cloak and dagger aspects need a ton of work IMO and that's what I'm looking for in a dlc.

Let's be optimistic....the paradox site does also say And much more, including updates and changes to the combat system  Perhaps the much more is just that?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on November 01, 2016, 04:09:25 PM
I hope you're right Rayfer - I'm sure there will be more content, but seems to me if it were planning truly exciting changes, Pdox would be highlighting that instead of "Look! New National Focuses!"
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on November 01, 2016, 09:28:49 PM
I hope the tree for Australia will be unique. I think that will be a great exvuse t get drunk, record and try to conquer yankland
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Silent Disapproval Robot on November 01, 2016, 10:00:36 PM
I hope the tree for Australia will be unique. I think that will be a great exvuse t get drunk, record and try to conquer yankland

http://www.satirewire.com/news/jan02/australia.shtml

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on November 02, 2016, 03:30:34 AM
I hope the tree for Australia will be unique.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-ally-down-under.977755/


(http://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/201951/ast_tree.jpg)


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jomni on November 02, 2016, 05:41:08 AM
Evil Australia eyeing NZ.  >:D
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ArizonaTank on November 02, 2016, 06:05:41 AM
First HOI4 expansion -- "Together for Victory" -- announced:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/ (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/together-for-victory-announced.979464/)

Gotta say, this doesn't exactly blow me away. "New National Focus trees" for Commonwealth nations seems to be the big selling point here - ? Really?

I mean, who cares about the UK and Commonwealth? We all know 'Murica won the war, with a minor assist from the Russkis  (*ducks and runs out of room*)   ;)

I am not excited about this either.... oh well....
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on November 02, 2016, 06:52:24 AM
I'll expect that the German and Soviet DLC will be released late on.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on November 02, 2016, 07:14:10 AM
To be honest I think its pretty cool for the British Commonwealth to get some love for a change, to often its about the US, Germany and USSR.

The British Commonwealth did a pretty good job at stemming the tide and keeping the soviets afloat.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on November 02, 2016, 07:59:14 AM
The British Commonwealth did a pretty good job at stemming the tide and keeping the soviets afloat.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. As an inveterate Yankee, I just couldn't resist the temptation to rib our fellow Crown and Commonwealth grogs a bit.   ;)

To be honest, the nation I think most in need of love is Japan, and I think that's been the case in every HOI game. I'd have to guess that from an AI programming standpoint, Japan must be the most difficult nation in the game to model correctly. So I'm not knocking Pdox, but I do think once again, the Pacific War is a mess in HOI, and solving the Japan AI seems key to improving it.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: jamus34 on November 02, 2016, 08:34:36 AM
Agreed sandman, and I think a lot of that has to with how poorly HOI models naval warfare. It's never been a strong point.

That said I don't know how you fix the naval combat without sacrificing the grand strategy feel of the game. I mean you go from needing 2 to 3 years in WitP to simulate the war assuming your doing 2 turns a day.
On the flip side you can probably play a full game of HOI in what 2, 3 weeks?

Again not sure what the solution is but the gap is both wide and deep...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on November 02, 2016, 09:54:50 AM
My own sense, from comments made around here, is that what the game most needs is massive AI upgrades.  In the meantime, additional DLC is fine--although charging for what feels like such a modest update does suggest that I'm best served to wait two years until a bunch of these is bundled on sale and the AI is improved.

Just to be clear, it's not even UK forces, it's the Commonwealth forces.  While Lord knows that the Aussies fought as well (probably better) man-for-man as any country in the war, it's curious to see these sorts of changes being rolled out to such minor participants.  I guess I'll need to wait to see what the price point is, and what some of the additional content mentioned in the link above actually represents.

If they price this low enough, it may just be an economic recon into the "How well can this title sell DLC?" area.  From a business standpoint, there's nothing to argue with there.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on November 02, 2016, 11:21:09 AM
I guess that's the thing that bothers me about this DLC. It doesn't seem like it's offering *essential* new content that brings HOI4 up to a new level. That's not a knock at all on the Commonwealth, it's a knock on the lack of ambition Pdox seems to be showing with this 'expansion.'

I'm surprised / disappointed to find myself in a position where I feel I could pass on the first HOI4 expansion without much loss to my game experience. Wasn't expecting that to be the case.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on November 02, 2016, 02:21:42 PM
I guess that's the thing that bothers me about this DLC. It doesn't seem like it's offering *essential* new content that brings HOI4 up to a new level. That's not a knock at all on the Commonwealth, it's a knock on the lack of ambition Pdox seems to be showing with this 'expansion.'

I'm surprised / disappointed to find myself in a position where I feel I could pass on the first HOI4 expansion without much loss to my game experience. Wasn't expecting that to be the case.

Paradox knows that AI is, persistently and pretty much across all games, their achilles heel. It seems to me that they like to keep their AI fixes low-key and headline something else in the patch/DLC, simply because they don't like to highlight AI. So you can never really know whether the important stuff gets fixed until the patch has been out a couple of weeks and you read forum reports from the vets and the tester nerds.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on November 02, 2016, 02:30:21 PM
I guess that's the thing that bothers me about this DLC. It doesn't seem like it's offering *essential* new content that brings HOI4 up to a new level. That's not a knock at all on the Commonwealth, it's a knock on the lack of ambition Pdox seems to be showing with this 'expansion.'

I'm surprised / disappointed to find myself in a position where I feel I could pass on the first HOI4 expansion without much loss to my game experience. Wasn't expecting that to be the case.

Paradox knows that AI is, persistently and pretty much across all games, their achilles heel. It seems to me that they like to keep their AI fixes low-key and headline something else in the patch/DLC, simply because they don't like to highlight AI. So you can never really know whether the important stuff gets fixed until the patch has been out a couple of weeks and you read forum reports from the vets and the tester nerds.

As a relatively new strategy gamer, knowing this makes me want to spend my limited gaming budget elsewhere.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Surtur on November 02, 2016, 03:40:01 PM
I guess that's the thing that bothers me about this DLC. It doesn't seem like it's offering *essential* new content that brings HOI4 up to a new level. That's not a knock at all on the Commonwealth, it's a knock on the lack of ambition Pdox seems to be showing with this 'expansion.'

I'm surprised / disappointed to find myself in a position where I feel I could pass on the first HOI4 expansion without much loss to my game experience. Wasn't expecting that to be the case.

This, I feel the same way and will probably only pick it up if/when I feel a strong urge to play one of the Commonwealth nations, which I don't usually do.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on November 04, 2016, 05:44:08 AM
Well, according to the latest dev diary there is extra content beyond the initial Commonwealth content:


Quote
Continuous Focuses
With Together for Victory we introduce a new type of national focuses. These can only be taken if you have done at least 10 regular focuses first and rather than taking 70 days and giving you a rewards they instead give you different kinds of bonuses while they are active (this means you can turn them off if you are low on political power or need to do something else). The base system here will be part of the 1.3 Torch patch, while the focuses related to new mechanics in the expansion will only be available to people who get that


https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-south-africa-together-for-victory.979679/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on November 04, 2016, 08:40:37 AM
My own sense, from comments made around here, is that what the game most needs is massive AI upgrades.  In the meantime, additional DLC is fine--although charging for what feels like such a modest update does suggest that I'm best served to wait two years until a bunch of these is bundled on sale and the AI is improved.

Just to be clear, it's not even UK forces, it's the Commonwealth forces.  While Lord knows that the Aussies fought as well (probably better) man-for-man as any country in the war, it's curious to see these sorts of changes being rolled out to such minor participants.  I guess I'll need to wait to see what the price point is, and what some of the additional content mentioned in the link above actually represents.

If they price this low enough, it may just be an economic recon into the "How well can this title sell DLC?" area.  From a business standpoint, there's nothing to argue with there.


 The more I play EU IV the more I am impressed with the AI.  It seems to make rational diplomatic decisions. It shows excellent competence in attack, defense, and naval, when it comes to warfare. Playing my last  EU game as Moskva, I was surprised again and again by how well the AI played some countries. So I know Paradox has the ability to make a pretty decent AI. Which is why I am not so sure why the HOI  AI always seems to be lacking. Could it be that the larger amount of  political and military options in HOI is just too much for the AI to handle?

 By the way, can anyone tell me if they are getting anything at all resembling a realistic Pacific War in HOI IV? Just curious as this has always been the weakest part of all the previous HOI games, and I was wondering if they had made any progress in this iteration. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Pete Dero on December 07, 2016, 08:27:16 AM
Preview of the content in the first expansion :

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 07, 2016, 10:11:34 AM
Have to say I'm a lot more interested in the upcoming patch than this expansion (which I will undoubtedly buy anyway).

I recently tried to get back into HOI4. But as others have said, the AI remains a serious problem. It builds far, far too many weak unsupported divisions (infantry div = 6-9 inf. battalions, + maybe an arty coy if they're lucky), still has serious trouble attacking or defending. AI also has serious trouble managing industry. In short, the game is just way too easy if you're playing a major power (which I always do).

I was hoping mods might save things, but I'm discouraged by the direction BlackICE is going in -- a 'more is always better' philosophy that I disagree with. One of the solid AI mods ("AI Research and Division Tweaks) stopped getting updated by the creator. Gave another, "Expert AI," a shot, and disliked the results -- found the AI hugely spamming air units and building little else -- and given how ridiculously skewed the air war remains, where you can lose your entire airforce in a couple of weeks, this made for an unplayable game.

Sigh. It's really frustrating. I overall love the improvements HOI4 made over 3. But the dismal AI just makes the game unenjoyable.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on December 07, 2016, 10:42:16 AM
I'm always fascinated by how there are such extremes in expressions of our experiences with the same game.  Regarding HoI4's AI one recent poster wrote: But the dismal AI just makes the game unenjoyable while another wrote: The more I play EU IV the more I am impressed with the AI. I play this game a lot and my opinion of the AI falls somewhere between the two.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on December 07, 2016, 10:59:20 AM
I'm always fascinated by how there are such extremes in expressions of our experiences with the same game.  Regarding HoI4's AI one recent poster wrote: But the dismal AI just makes the game unenjoyable while another wrote: The more I play EU IV the more I am impressed with the AI. I play this game a lot and my opinion of the AI falls somewhere between the two.

 I was talking about EU IVs AI, not HOI IV, and why EU IVs AI,  which is made by the same company so good. While HOI IVs AI just seems to be so damn bad.

As a side note I have checked the forums and it seem the Pacific Theater still shows no resemblance of reality in this version of HOI. 

 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on December 07, 2016, 11:07:05 AM
I'm always fascinated by how there are such extremes in expressions of our experiences with the same game.  Regarding HoI4's AI one recent poster wrote: But the dismal AI just makes the game unenjoyable while another wrote: The more I play EU IV the more I am impressed with the AI. I play this game a lot and my opinion of the AI falls somewhere between the two.

 I was talking about EU IVs AI, not HOI IV, and why EU IVs AI,  which is made by the same company so good. While HOI IVs AI just seems to be so damn bad.

As a side note I have checked the forums and it seem the Pacific Theater still shows no resemblance of reality in this version of HOI.

I believe that the biggest EU IV AI improvements originated with modders who cooperated with Paradox.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Rayfer on December 07, 2016, 12:45:43 PM
I'm always fascinated by how there are such extremes in expressions of our experiences with the same game.  Regarding HoI4's AI one recent poster wrote: But the dismal AI just makes the game unenjoyable while another wrote: The more I play EU IV the more I am impressed with the AI. I play this game a lot and my opinion of the AI falls somewhere between the two.

 I was talking about EU IVs AI, not HOI IV, and why EU IVs AI,  which is made by the same company so good. While HOI IVs AI just seems to be so damn bad.

As a side note I have checked the forums and it seem the Pacific Theater still shows no resemblance of reality in this version of HOI.

Sorry....got my HoI's and EU's mixed up.  :o
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 07, 2016, 01:22:55 PM
Also -- and I'm not a programmer so this is speculation -- I have to believe that programming the AI for HOI is vastly more difficult than EU. Not saying that EU is a simple game -- it's anything but -- but the sheer number of complex things the AI in HOI has to manage is staggering. Thus I'm not surprised Pdox has struggled to create a good AI for HOI -- but I really wish they'd make improving it the priority. I frankly don't care too much about national focus trees and the other stuff this new expansion is offering. It feels like just so much window dressing -- very nice to look at, but hardly essential.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: acctingman on December 07, 2016, 01:38:12 PM
I SO want to like this game, but I struggled with it, however, I'm sure it's because this was my first foray in the genre.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on December 07, 2016, 01:54:04 PM
Also -- and I'm not a programmer so this is speculation -- I have to believe that programming the AI for HOI is vastly more difficult than EU. Not saying that EU is a simple game -- it's anything but -- but the sheer number of complex things the AI in HOI has to manage is staggering. Thus I'm not surprised Pdox has struggled to create a good AI for HOI -- but I really wish they'd make improving it the priority. I frankly don't care too much about national focus trees and the other stuff this new expansion is offering. It feels like just so much window dressing -- very nice to look at, but hardly essential.

Exactly. Fix the AI and I will probably buy all the expansions. Don't and I may never play it again.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bboyer66 on December 07, 2016, 04:08:49 PM
Also -- and I'm not a programmer so this is speculation -- I have to believe that programming the AI for HOI is vastly more difficult than EU. Not saying that EU is a simple game -- it's anything but -- but the sheer number of complex things the AI in HOI has to manage is staggering. Thus I'm not surprised Pdox has struggled to create a good AI for HOI -- but I really wish they'd make improving it the priority. I frankly don't care too much about national focus trees and the other stuff this new expansion is offering. It feels like just so much window dressing -- very nice to look at, but hardly essential.

I have been saying this for a while now.  Why put all these bells and whistles into the game, when the AI has no idea on how to utilize them. We are up to HOI IV and the Japanese still have no clue what they are doing.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FlickJax on December 08, 2016, 06:41:47 AM
Also -- and I'm not a programmer so this is speculation -- I have to believe that programming the AI for HOI is vastly more difficult than EU. Not saying that EU is a simple game -- it's anything but -- but the sheer number of complex things the AI in HOI has to manage is staggering. Thus I'm not surprised Pdox has struggled to create a good AI for HOI -- but I really wish they'd make improving it the priority. I frankly don't care too much about national focus trees and the other stuff this new expansion is offering. It feels like just so much window dressing -- very nice to look at, but hardly essential.

I have been saying this for a while now.  Why put all these bells and whistles into the game, when the AI has no idea on how to utilize them. We are up to HOI IV and the Japanese still have no clue what they are doing.

I don't think they had much of a clue at the time, poking a bear like they did...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 08, 2016, 08:21:44 AM
I have been saying this for a while now.  Why put all these bells and whistles into the game, when the AI has no idea on how to utilize them.

The ironic thing is, Dan and the dev team specifically said this was one of the big goals going into HOI4 -- to only implement features the AI could handle. It was the main reason they gave for getting rid of the CnC/OOB structure -- Dan said the AI just couldn't handle it, so out it went.

I was pretty strongly against that decision at the time -- and still do miss the OOB -- but in the end, I accepted the reasoning behind it.

Overall, I have to say, I think Dan and his team did an amazing job putting HOI4 together. I think 4 improves on 3 in many, many areas. The problem is, all the improvements in the world aren't worth much if the AI is bad and the game is just completely unchallenging, and hence, not much fun...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on December 09, 2016, 07:57:34 AM
AI Updates immanent:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-cosmetic-tags-art-gameplay-and-ai.987053/

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-together-for-victory-ai-update-2.987492/


Full parts quoted:

Quote
AI improvements #1

The other day I ran a poll on twitter and 630 people voted for us to do special smaller AI diaries, so we will be kicking this off by including the first part by @SteelVolt here, but after that he will be posting them separately up until release (next one on friday). Initially he will be going over the patch changelog step by step (the whole log will get revealed the day before release, but I figured Iíd point out where the stuff is coming from already :) ), so over to him:

Hey everyone!
This time around we thought we would tell you about AI fixes and improvements by looking at some points in the changelog and go a bit deeper into what they actually mean.

First of all, working on a game like Hearts of Iron is a real adventure. So many interacting systems leads to butterfly effects all over the place, sometimes in unexpected ways. And in no other area is this more clear than AI. Fix one thing, and something else becomes a problem. I will be sharing some stories from the trenches over these diaries, And I thought I would start with one from when we were working on Sunflower. When working with the balance of units in Africa (I think we can all recall those massive wars being fought in the deserts of north Africa). Making the AI a lot less interested in sending units there did indeed make them not put all their troops there. What we saw in our hands off runs the following days was that Germany struggled really bad with taking Europe. A lot more than it had before. It turned out that when the Allies no longer cared about Africa, they would send almost all their forces immediately into France to help them push back Germany. This even included Australia.
So in a sense, I am playing a super complex game of whack-a-mole with the code.

Anyway, since this is the first of these to focus on the changelog, I thought it would be a good idea to take a look at some of the straight up bugs that has been taken care of.

- AI now attempts to recover when units are unable to reach desired front location.

    It turned out that encircled AI units tended to become overly passive. This was due to them playing it too safe and not being able to find a secure path back to the main front. Expect them to fight back a bit more now.


- AI no longer ends up in strange state where they are assigned to a root order but not a following attack order.

    Reassignments could sometimes lead units to get stuck not being assigned to an advancement order. Since they were not flagged as unassigned (they were, after all, assigned to the root order), and given that orders often ends up being split, this was not always evident. This would improve the AI's ability to attack in general.


- Fixed strange bug in AI order assignment that left units assigned to a group but not an order.

    The underlying cause is not as related to the previous one as it may seem, and the effects were even more dire. The tricky part here is that due to how the game works internally, some actions must be resolved in a central update loop before others can be done. This means that the AI is forced to set up their stuff in steps, but due to that the last steps changes MAY be outdated, the code to manage all this easily becomes a bit hard to follow. The fixes for this in particular should make the AI behave more reliably in relation to the plans it makes.


- Made sure AI is capable of calling subjects into wars even if they are not in a faction.

    Another really basic one. Turns out the AI would not even bother considering calling in countries to wars if they were not in the same faction. There are, however, countries that CAN be called into wars that do not follow this rule: puppets. While most puppets are set up as being part of factions, at least before wars happen, this slipped under the radar for quite a while. The notable exception is Japan and its early war with China.


That's it for round one, and I have to tell you I am really stoked about getting the update into your hands. If your pet peeve was not covered in this text, just relax and wait for the other ones. The next will be more about bug fixes, and after that I will go into improvements.

Next diary (that isnt about AI) will go over achievements, some UI improvements and the full patch log with changes!

And don't forget today's World War Wednesday stream starting at 16:00CET on www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive. We'll be showing you Together for Victory features and answer as many questions about the expansion as we can during the stream.
You can pre-order Together for Victory here! If you are an owner of the Expansion Pass you'll already get it (together with the next 2 expansions). Owning Together for Victory will also grant you new forum avatars and an unique icon! (actually people with just base game will also get a few new ones as of today)
 
AI improvements #2

   

    Hello again!

    It is already time for another AI mini diary, going into some more detail about points in the changelog for the upcoming Together for Victory update!

    (To read part one, scroll to the end of the last DD, which can be found here.)

    Todays story from the trenches relates to one of the seemingly basic AI features that is a hell of a lot harder than it seems; balancing the divisions between the orders. A human can do this without much thinking, given our superior pattern recognition capabilities. The AI is not as lucky, and has to do some educated guesses based on what numbers are available in a given situation. The code for doing this has grown in phases since about two years back, in some sences almost uncontrolably so due to chasing a good enough state for deadlines. After a while, what easily happens with such systems is that parts of the code "fix" problems that are no longer problems. Indeed, more than just making the code unnecessarily complicated, it can cause new bugs.
    This is exactly what happened with this system. It can roughly be divided into three steps, and after some failed attempts at fixing some bugs related to it, I ended up ripping out and rewriting the entire step two, reducing the size of it by about 30%. This also meant that I could remove about 20% of step three. The result has been that the system is easier to read, debug and maintain, even though it lead to some new bugs related to the rewriting. I still see cases where the behaviour is not 100%, but the overall performance of it appears a significant improvement, and the AIs ability to recover from strange situations is a lot better.

    - Fixed bug where AI would keep swapping a fighter with land equipment at the top of the list for all eternity.

        If you ever observed the AI (sorry about observer mode still not being a guarantee), you may have noticed at least some countries getting stuck swapping the two top lines if they were a fighter and some land equipment. A fairly basic code booboo that has now been resolved, resulting in a positive impact to AI production.


    - AI should now be capable of using rockets.

        Exactly what it says. The problem here was that rocket bases, though internally represented as air bases, are kept in a separate list from the regular air bases. Just including that list when considering missions should mean AI can now use their sometimes ample supply of rockets.


    - Fixed overflow that cause some countries to not build planes causing USA to end up with 0 strategic bombers.

        Yet another basic one. When implementing features it is easy to just look that the standard cases, and thus miss the late game edge cases. In this case the USA wanted strategic bombers so much that the number overflowed and became a ridiculous negative number in stead.


    - Made sure released AI countries don't get stuck building nothing.

        Again, pretty basic. A flag was not set, and the AI was never run for released countries. But who releases a country without playing as it, anyway? ;P


    That covers some more of the fixes that has been made for the AI. As before; I have more to tell you about so hold off on worrying about your favourite AI bugs ;)
    Next time I will be talking about some of the improvements, though when it comes to AI the line between what is a bugfix and what is an improvement is very blurry.
     


Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 09, 2016, 08:41:26 AM
That's encouraging.

Things I really wish they'd prioritize fixing:

1. AI building 100s and 100s of useless divisions. Need much fewer divisions based on templates that bear some resemblance to ww2 reality.

2. Related to this:  AI spamming expeditionary forces. When I see Venezuelan divisions helping protect the German fatherland, or Japanese fighter wings help protect the airspace over Vichy France (and have seen those things more than once) -- well, let's just say it's a bit immersion-breaking

3. For God's sake -- *NERF air combat*!!! Even on conservative engagement settings, you lose hundreds of aircraft in the span of days. In my recent playthrough as Germany, the invasion of Poland alone cost me several hundred fighters -- simply fighting against the (apparently awesome) Polish airforces. Yes, they lost similar numbers, but it's ridiculous in the extreme that the airforces you spend years building up from 1936-39 vanish in the course of a few weeks simply due to routine combat.

4. Naval combat. What can one say, and where to begin? It remains a complete mess. Unescorted cruisers and battleships massacring u-boats. Enough said.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: IronX on December 09, 2016, 11:08:07 AM
It really makes you wonder why they release their games in this shape. Surely they knew how bad the AI was in certain areas and that the community would call them out on it.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: glen55 on December 09, 2016, 11:34:54 AM
The one that made me quit is when you try to use the battle planner, your lines would continually readjust themselves with units always peeling off to go from one end of the line to the other, such that you would never get the bonus for a fully-planned order. Made the battle planner useless.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Skoop on December 09, 2016, 11:44:59 AM
The one that made me quit is when you try to use the battle planner, your lines would continually readjust themselves with units always peeling off to go from one end of the line to the other, such that you would never get the bonus for a fully-planned order. Made the battle planner useless.

They want you to buy dlc that improves the ai I bet, that's how it went with hoiIII.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 09, 2016, 03:09:07 PM
The one that made me quit is when you try to use the battle planner, your lines would continually readjust themselves with units always peeling off to go from one end of the line to the other, such that you would never get the bonus for a fully-planned order. Made the battle planner useless.

Yup, this is a major headache. I love the battle planner in theory, but clearly it needs some further tweaking in order to be truly useful.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on December 13, 2016, 07:54:57 AM
AI Update #3 is up:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-together-for-victory-ai-update-3.988100/

Quote
Hi everyone!
It is me again; your friendly neighbourhood AI developer. Today I will move on from focusing on bugs to looking at what we consider improvements, though as I stated at the end of the last diary the line between the two is very blurry when it comes to the AI.

This is the third installment of these mini diaries, and if you missed the other you can check out #1 (scroll to the bottom of that diary) and #2 respectively.

But to kick it off I thought I would tell you yet another story from the trenches.
We often run the game hands off over nights to see how it progresses for various countries, such as how the Japan vs China conflict works out. Some months before release I found an overnight had gotten a very surprising result: Italy had annexed almost the entire Soviet Union, while Germany had completely opted out of any Soviet territories. If any country beats Soviet Union, it does certainly NOT tend to be AI Italy, so something was clearly up. Going back in the autosaves we could see that it was indeed Germany pulling the most weight in the war, so the conclusion was that something unintended was going on in the peace conference. Letting the game run through the peace conference the crazy result was easily reproduced; Italy would consistently take Soviet territory, while Germany opts out and thus pass on their war score to Italy. So the question remained: why?
After a little digging I found that the fascist peace conference AI was set up to want to take neighboring territory, but be very reluctant with non-neighboring areas. But clearly Germany must have been neighboring Soviet? Well...in a sense. They had indeed defeated Poland before taking on the Soviet Union, but they were only occupying Polands states, since Poland had joined the Allies, which had of course not yet capitulated. Since we separate ownership and control of areas, and the neighboring check looked specifically at ownership (after all, Germany was not guaranteed to get to KEEP Poland), they ended up ignoring Soviet areas as NOT connected to their own areas, while Italy had annexed Romania in an earlier war and considered their areas as connected by land to Soviets.

The peace conference AI has since been refined to avoid silliness like this, but it does serve to illustrate how you need to keep a lot of different potential situations in mind when designing and programming AI. And this is far from the most complicated systems.

Today I will introduce something brand new; my work on encriclement AI!

- AI now attempts to detect and react to many encirclement opportunities, both against itself and against enemies. Includes evacuating dangerous areas and cutting off bottlenecks.

    Detecting potential encirclement situations is a really hard problem. A human, with her superior pattern recognition abilities, can take a glance at a map and point out such situations in practically no time at all. A computer, not so much. The thing is that you need to consider the relation between at least five or so provinces to detect the smallest encirclements, and for large ones the number gets really big. Computers are inherently bad at considering more than one relation at a time. While the approach for narrower bottlenecks and larger encirclement patterns is somewhat different, and particularly the latter is not 100% accurate, but where to draw the line between potential encirclement is not always clear anyway. The type of reaction varies a bit depending on the situation detected, but all in all the AI is better at countering attempts at encirclement and to try to act on opportunities they get. Though there is of course room for some improvement I must say I am quite happy with the number of situations the AI is actually able to detect with relatively few false positives. I hope this makes the game both more challenging and engaging for you!



Of course, I cannot only leave you with only one point, even if it is a big one, so I will also use this diary to talk a bit about defensive AI.

- Split up AI garrison order in two: home area and other areas.

    For a country like Germany, using a single garrison order is fine. For a country like the Soviet Union or even France, they risk having units sent around the world, not doing much to help at all, just because the order mechanic is attempting to balance the units inside the order. Not to mention how strangely balanced the spread becomes due to area around the capital typically gets too few units while far away areas ends up with too many. Splitting up the order greatly improves the AIs ability to defend. The units move around less withing each order, and the AI can balance between oversea areas (or...you know...Siberia) and the area around its capital.


- AI is no longer using all types of garrison locations.

    The AI can and does indeed make use of this new feature. In many situations it is a waste of units to garrison everything you possibly can. While being on the offensive, garrisoning your forts can typically be wasteful if not all ports are covered to defend against potential invasions.


And that is all for today. Next time (which is probably going to be wednesday) I intend to be talking about boats and boaty related stuff. Until then, I am getting back to work on more improvements for future updates.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 13, 2016, 08:52:24 AM
"- AI now attempts to detect and react to many encirclement opportunities, both against itself and against enemies. Includes evacuating dangerous areas and cutting off bottlenecks."

I'm kind of amazed (and dismayed) that things like this are only being added to game 6+ months after release.... :(
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ExWargamerJoe on December 13, 2016, 08:57:53 AM
"- AI now attempts to detect and react to many encirclement opportunities, both against itself and against enemies. Includes evacuating dangerous areas and cutting off bottlenecks."

I'm kind of amazed (and dismayed) that things like this are only being added to game 6+ months after release.... :(

Well, not that I know a lot about game development, but I imagine when you're first coding things like AI, you give it a bunch of tools in the hope that it will 'naturally' use those to pull off strategies like encirclement. I mean, you want it to be able to defend itself properly and react to player behaviour right? My best guess is that they took an all-purpose approach initially.

When obvious gaps show up though, you then specifically code in behaviour for specific action-sets without breaking what you've already done - which is what we have now. I wouldn't say it's a case of them not thinking of it, it's just that they now have to code in that specific behaviour because - for whatever reason - it's not reacting naturally to this stuff.

Battles in HoI 4 can be quite hectic with a lot of factors that need to be taken into account all at once - it's probably quite hard to test for this stuff.

Just my thoughts anyway.

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 13, 2016, 09:39:15 AM
That's a fair point, and I definitely don't underestimate just how difficult it must be to program an AI for a game as complex as HOI4. What worries me, is that Pdox may have built a beautiful, groundbreaking ww2 game that is simply beyond AI's capabilities to play effectively.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on December 13, 2016, 10:24:48 AM
That's a fair point, and I definitely don't underestimate just how difficult it must be to program an AI for a game as complex as HOI4. What worries me, is that Pdox may have built a beautiful, groundbreaking ww2 game that is simply beyond AI's capabilities to play effectively.

That is totally fine by me because quite frankly, it is the only way someone like me will stand any chance of succeeding. If the AI actually knew what it was doing, I wouldn't stand a snow ball's chance in hell of making it past 1941.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: sandman2575 on December 13, 2016, 11:55:18 AM
I'm not someone who needs a super-challenging AI by any means -- I often find the fun and challenge of a game is just learning how to play it. 

But my sense (over 200 hrs played!) is that HOI4's AI is simply a push-over. I didn't feel that way about HOI3. I knew I could always beat HOI3, but AI was just challenging enough to keep it interesting. HOI4's AI seems like 3's stupider cousin.  :uglystupid2:
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: JudgeDredd on December 13, 2016, 12:55:18 PM
That's a fair point, and I definitely don't underestimate just how difficult it must be to program an AI for a game as complex as HOI4. What worries me, is that Pdox may have built a beautiful, groundbreaking ww2 game that is simply beyond AI's capabilities to play effectively.

That is totally fine by me because quite frankly, it is the only way someone like me will stand any chance of succeeding. If the AI actually knew what it was doing, I wouldn't stand a snow ball's chance in hell of making it past 1941.

Amen...I don't need super challenging AI - especially in Grand Strategy games as I don't have "the big picture" mentality.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bobarossa on December 13, 2016, 01:39:51 PM
What worries me, is that Pdox may have built a beautiful, groundbreaking ww2 game that is simply beyond AI's capabilities to play effectively.
I think they've done that a number of times now  ;)

And as far as AI goes, I hoped that they were able to reuse the concepts (not code) developed for HOI3.  Envelopment ideas for HOI3 should carry over to HOI4 unless they use significantly different sized regions. 
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on December 14, 2016, 07:27:26 AM
AI Update #4 addresses Pacific invasions / Invasions and Division Design by the AI:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-together-for-victory-ai-update-4.988515/

also

Patch 1.3 'Torch' patch notes: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-achievements-patchlog.988330/
   
Quote
    Greeting friends!

    This will be the last of these before the release of Together for Victory, and unless I am to write one about a hotfix, the last one for the year.

    This weeks tale from the trenches will actually be about one of the points in the changelog. Sorry about cheating like this for the last diary, but it was too good to leave out:
    - Scary fix makes AI actually consider all target areas of enemy, in stead of one at a time. Should set pacific area ablaze when the time comes, and keep the invasions rolling.

        Wow...so...way back in development before the invasion craft tech limited the number of divisions you could use for invasions, the AI sometimes had a tendency to set up A LOT of them. As a fix for this, that did do the trick in the general case, the AI would consider ONE area per enemy for invasion at a time, before doing another one. When I say area here, it is any enemy territory with land connection to all parts of itself...shitty description, so a couple of examples: Ostpreussen is a separate area from main Germany, which is its own area, so Germany initially consists of two areas. When/if they annex Austria, it becomes part of the main German area. Similarly, every single island is its own area.

    At this point, I am sure you can see at least a few problems this could cause in the pacific. My hopes were that Japan and USA would invade each other, and the invasions would be small enough to happen often enough that this would not become a problem. However...when the invasion is to an island that has had its port taken over by someone else, the AI would not be able to plan an invasion to it, and thus not make any more invasions until that area was fully conquered...which was not a guarantee.
    This restriction was lifted, and the scary part of this was letting the AI be potentially a lot more active. It has turned out that the invasion craft limits and tweaks to the front balancing balances this out really well.

    This is a good example of how fixes to earlier problems can cause new ones further down the line as development progresses. This happens a lot in AI, and not rarely will the same symptom pop up over and over but due to new reasons under the hood.

    So, moving on with more boaty stuff:

    - Added a "pacific continent" to aid in AI prio.
    - Added contininent prioritization for the AI with high scores to Europe and the Pacific, but low to Africa.

        Calculating the value of a larger area is expensive, and the value of locations like the pacific islands depends less on what they contain in terms of buildings and resources and more about where they are located. By introducing scriptable priority for areas, which can be modified through script on a per country bases, it is possible to tweak where countries should focus and even base this on triggers. So, merry christmas, modders :)

    This is also an important part in improving the AIs pacific activity, and is an extra part of reducing their African ditto.

    - AI sets up a couple of fleets to be used for special missions.

        The AI tries to prioritize naval regions based on a ton of variables, and in the end may miss out on covering some important stuff. By ear marking a couple of fleets for specialized missions, such as covering invasions, the AI is now better at not getting stuck waiting for fleets that may never come before being able to invade. It also steps up its general naval game a bit.


    - Made sure that AI does not completely block itself when having multiple invasion orders against the same area but being unable to cover the regions for all of them at the same time.

        The naval invasion AI tries to coordinate invasions against the same area, but forcing it to do this would make it never invade if it was unable to cover all necessary regions for all the invasions at the same time. This restriction was softened, so the AI will be more capable at getting stuff done. This one was hitting Japan hard when they wanted to navally invade south.


    - Made AI better at supporting naval invasions by focusing on the next one to complete preparation.
    * This one might seem either cryptic or obvious. Before the AI would just pick the top invasion on a list to focus on first, now it picks the one that is next in line to be done preparing.

    - Tweaked naval invasion priority to make them more inclined to take islands (particularly with air bases) and home region.

        Pretty much speaks for itself, particularly in the context of the Pacific theater.


    - Made AI invasions scriptably more unpredictable.

        While only a define for now, it should make life more interesting in singleplayer, with less hammering of invasions in the same location over and over. Also gives modders another thing to play with :)


    - Stabilized AI invasion prio scores. Should result in invasions not swapping units around as much and randomly getting canceled.

        Under the hood the AI has a priority score for every orders. The invasion score was allowed to depend on variables that shifted from day to day, such as preparation level. This would cause different numbers of units to be assigned to them over time, causing some really bad behaviour. Stabilizing this score has made the invasion AI a lot more stable and reliable.


    That was more or less all the work that has been done to the naval AI. The changelog had more AI points in it, some really heavy and important stuff related to AI division design among other things. I really hope you will enjoy the DLC, and even if you don't get it, I hope all these fixes will increase your enjoyment of the game. And either way, I look forward to keep improving the HoI4 AI, and you can all look forward to more improvements being done.
     

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Greybriar on December 15, 2016, 07:24:19 AM
I just received an email from Paradox. They wrote:

New Hearts of Iron IV Expansion Out Today

Link (https://www.paradoxplaza.com/hearts-of-iron-iv-together-for-victory?utm_source=Community+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a0d1380f46-emsub-ftv_hoi_20161215_rel&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6b1b68c4d1-a0d1380f46-146367869)
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: bbmike on December 15, 2016, 07:24:57 AM
Do they think you have problems seeing?  :o
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on December 15, 2016, 08:45:25 AM
I can confirm that Japanese AI is now invading in the Pacific.

Started playing as UK in '39 and Japan joined the Axis and got roped into the war early. They are now invading the Gilbert isles in the Pacific...

Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Jarhead0331 on December 15, 2016, 09:02:35 AM
I can confirm that Japanese AI is now invading in the Pacific.

Started playing as UK in '39 and Japan joined the Axis and got roped into the war early. They are now invading the Gilbert isles in the Pacific...

Is this with the DLC, or just the update/patch?
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Ian C on December 15, 2016, 09:23:23 AM

Is this with the DLC, or just the update/patch?

I have the DLC so not entirely sure, however, the AI updates listed in the patch notes don't specify it's the DLC features:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-achievements-patchlog.988330/


EDIT: Japan have taken Tarawa and are now invading Ellice Isles and Guadalcanal. The AI Pacific theatre is now working I guess...
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ExWargamerJoe on December 15, 2016, 10:10:09 AM
Here's our thoughts on TfV: http://www.wargamer.com/reviews/review-hearts-of-iron-iv-together-for-victory/

I've been playing a test game with Australia and I'm seeing Japanese forces popping up on islands all over the shop. They took the Solomon Islands from me which I had to take back. There's even been counter invasions from allied AI, I think but I can't quite tell. Ai seems to like to plonk units on islands atm and not do anything with them.

Also wanted to point out the Division Designer guide we wrote a few months ago as well, whilst I'm here :) http://www.wargamer.com/news/war-machine-division-theory-in-hearts-of-iron-iv/
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Swatter on December 15, 2016, 08:16:15 PM
But my sense (over 200 hrs played!) is that HOI4's AI is simply a push-over. I didn't feel that way about HOI3. I knew I could always beat HOI3, but AI was just challenging enough to keep it interesting. HOI4's AI seems like 3's stupider cousin.  :uglystupid2:

I sadly agree. The more complicated you make various aspects of the game, the smarter the AI needs to be. Paradox just hasn't struck the right balance yet.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: FarAway Sooner on December 15, 2016, 09:33:22 PM
You know, somebody a while back (in this thread, I think) posted that Paradox always works hard on improving their AI for a long time after release but doesn't like to talk about it much when announcing what will happen.  I think the contents of this last announcement really showcase that.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: Hofstadter on December 16, 2016, 01:38:02 AM
People dont seem to be happy with it. Its getting mixed on steam
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post by: ExWargamerJoe on December 16, 2016, 02:40:07 AM
People dont seem to be happy with it. Its getting mixed on steam

It's hardly their most game-changing expansion, but not every expansion they do these days feels like a proper "expansion". Cossacks and Mare Nostrum were a bit meh in EUIV, compared to something like Rights of Man.
Title: Re: Hearts of Iron IV
Post