Hearts of Iron IV

[Moreb]

I always jump in with Germany

I was afraid you were going to say that. I wonder if me messing around as Germany will put me behind so much that I lose the initiative? Maybe once I can get Steam to function for me I plop the funds down and try one more time.

I don't own Together for Victory or Death or Dishonor. Would you recommend those in addition to Man the Guns? Are they necessary? I do own Waking the Tiger.


Thanks in advance

[Ian C]

Thanks. Is there a nation you'd recommend to start with that doesn't overwhelm?

Any inexperience will actually lend itself to historical play - like playing Poland in 1936. As you get more experience, try France then the U.S.  Playing as the U.S.gives you the benefit of playing a major nation but with a long time to get things together.

One important tip about game speed: in peace time you can play at the fastest time speed. During war time I would not recommend anyone play above speed 3, better still, speed 2.
Speed 2 in actually the optimum time I guess, which means games last long but anything above speed 2 risks you missing something important on the map somewhere and also being unable to react in time to breakthroughs etc.

[Moreb]

Thanks. Is there a nation you'd recommend to start with that doesn't overwhelm?

Any inexperience will actually lend itself to historical play - like playing Poland in 1936. As you get more experience, try France then the U.S.  Playing as the U.S.gives you the benefit of playing a major nation but with a long time to get things together.

One important tip about game speed: in peace time you can play at the fastest time speed. During war time I would not recommend anyone play above speed 3, better still, speed 2.
Speed 2 in actually the optimum time I guess, which means games last long but anything above speed 2 risks you missing something important on the map somewhere and also being unable to react in time to breakthroughs etc.

I haven't pulled the trigger yet on the new dlc. Would you recommend it? I don't own Together for Victory or Death or Dishonor. Would you recommend those in addition to Man the Guns? Are they necessary? I do own Waking the Tiger.

[Jarhead0331]

Thanks. Is there a nation you'd recommend to start with that doesn't overwhelm?

Playing as the U.S.gives you the benefit of playing a major nation but with a long time to get things together.

Yes, but I find the US focus tree to be downright bewildering...it makes my eyes water and I break out into a sweat.

[Rayfer]

Thanks. Is there a nation you'd recommend to start with that doesn't overwhelm?

Playing as the U.S.gives you the benefit of playing a major nation but with a long time to get things together.

Yes, but I find the US focus tree to be downright bewildering...it makes my eyes water and I break out into a sweat.

LOL...I had the same reaction but stayed with it, finally realizing that one big part of it was the path to a communist America and another the path to a fascist America, both of which I've read will lead to a second Civil War.  Still...it is daunting.

[Ian C]

I haven't pulled the trigger yet on the new dlc. Would you recommend it? I don't own Together for Victory or Death or Dishonor. Would you recommend those in addition to Man the Guns? Are they necessary? I do own Waking the Tiger.

Well I own all DLC so I don't know what playing without them is like. I'm hesitant  to recommend anything in case you think it sucks. The new DLC is pretty huge though. The naval changes alone make it worth getting - more than any other DLC but it's a fresh release and it needs some balancing and bug fixing, although nothing is necessarily game-breaking I think. After this DLC it is closer to a classic war game than it was before. The fuel feature gives it a new layer of logistical planning which can bite you in ass. It adds more dimension, along with the naval features, and I'm still getting to grips with it.

Together for Victory DLC - the main features are the Spearhead battle command which allows you to plan armored breakthroughs and the Lend Lease changes.

With the Death or Dishonor DLC  the main features are equipment conversion and new Diplomatic actions. Both DLC's contain new focus trees and many other features but those are the ones that mattered to me.

If you know what the game is like already and enjoy it, I don't think you can go wrong with Man the Guns, although it needs a little fine-tuning as it's a new release. Plus proper freaking documentation. A tutorial would have been nice.

[SirAndrewD]

I haven't pulled the trigger yet on the new dlc. Would you recommend it? I don't own Together for Victory or Death or Dishonor. Would you recommend those in addition to Man the Guns? Are they necessary? I do own Waking the Tiger.

They're nice but not essential.  Ian covers it pretty well above.  For a while Death or Dishonor actually was not great to play with because it made things go very wacky in the Balkans, but that seems to have been toned down with tweaking. 

The Spearhead option in Together for Victory isn't that great.  You can get better results controlling your armored thrusts manually. 

I'd say get them on a sale unless the countries they concentrate on really interest you.  They also improve the gameplay of the UK. 

You've got the two essential ones in Waking the Tiger and Man the Guns.

[Moreb]

Thanks guys.

Yes, I had to edit a two word post.

[Pete Dero]

I haven't pulled the trigger yet on the new dlc. Would you recommend it? I don't own Together for Victory or Death or Dishonor. Would you recommend those in addition to Man the Guns? Are they necessary? I do own Waking the Tiger.

https://www.wargamer.com/articles/hearts-of-iron-4-dlc-buying-guide/

[Jarhead0331]

The more I look at the focus trees, the more I see how open to "alternate history" the game has become. Ahistorical outcomes can no longer simply be chalked up to wonky AI. Rather, it appears choosing alternative historical paths is actually incentivized by the game. Each one I have spent time looking at contains at least one, sometimes two or three alternate historical paths.  For instance...as Germany, you can choose to oppose Hitler, or ally with the communists. As the US, you can steer the ship toward communism, or fascism and then trigger a second Civil War.

Regardless of the intentions when HOI began, it is clearly no longer focused on an authentic historical experience. Rather, its a fairly open game based within the context of a historical era with the opportunity to take things in a new direction to test various "what ifs"...

From this perspective, the decision to move to modern historical boundaries makes a little more sense. Not saying I like it, but it is not as head scratching as it was at first blush.

[ArizonaTank]

The more I look at the focus trees, the more I see how open to "alternate history" the game has become. Ahistorical outcomes can no longer simply be chalked up to wonky AI. Rather, it appears choosing alternative historical paths is actually incentivized by the game. Each one I have spent time looking at contains at least one, sometimes two or three alternate historical paths.  For instance...as Germany, you can choose to oppose Hitler, or ally with the communists. As the US, you can steer the ship toward communism, or fascism and then trigger a second Civil War.

Regardless of the intentions when HOI began, it is clearly no longer focused on an authentic historical experience. Rather, its a fairly open game based within the context of a historical era with the opportunity to take things in a new direction to test various "what ifs"...

From this perspective, the decision to move to modern historical boundaries makes a little more sense. Not saying I like it, but it is not as head scratching as it was at first blush.

I am playing a game now where I pushed Japan towards democracy and away from the militarists. It's early 1940 and the Japanese have joined the Allies against Germany and Italy. A Japanese / British / Free French force is pushing the Italians out of Ethiopia / Sudan.

Its fun and will keep the game fresh...I am already thinking about playing Japan from the militarist side.

But the ahistorical stuff can be overdone. The game Making History was flawed because it turned into a tossed salad of alliances by 1938 that no longer even hinted at history.  When you added in the fact that there was no logistics tether...you got some really strange things. I remember one game where the Kuomintang staged a naval invasion of Germany...that was a little too much for me.

So far, I haven't seen anything really wild like that in HOI IV.

I haven't tried it yet, but I guess if I want a more historical HOI IV experience, the 14 Aug 39 scenario is probably a good start.

Hopefully with time we will see some other historical starts in HOI IV ...May 1940...June 1941...May 1942...July 1943...June 1944...etc. DLC I would happily pay for.

[Ian C]

From this perspective, the decision to move to modern historical boundaries makes a little more sense. Not saying I like it, but it is not as head scratching as it was at first blush.

Another thing: there's a post of the Paradox forums that states that it's no longer possible to play past 1948 if your nation is at peace. Kind of ironic, since those boundaries won't be of use in that case.


As for historical AI play: check out the Custom Rules before you start a game. There in an option for many nations to follow purely historical paths.

Here's an example: put the attached file http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=16963.0;attach=14062 in Documents\Paradox Interactive\Hearts of Iron IV\game rules and load it up.



Also: very good new naval guide:

Post on how naval detection works: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/naval-detection-guide.1157358/



Also a tip: Carrier aircraft cannot be trained while in port.

[Rayfer]

Also a tip: Carrier aircraft cannot be trained while in port.
[/quote]

Thanks for this tip. I haven't been able to get the carrier pilots trained....now I know why.

[JasonPratt]

The date is August 30, 1939 and Germany is about to invade Poland with 3 Armies of 72 divisions led by three of the finest generals of the war. This force should be overwhelming, but I just don't know. I'm nervous to issue the order to cross the border...

Something like this actually happened historically: within a day of the Molly-Ribbet pact ;) , Hitler was trying to invade Poland early rather than waiting for the agreed-upon kickoff date. (Which Stalin eventually abrogated anyway, but Hitler didn't know that at the time.) The divisions were on the way for a dawn attack, some special ops troops had already crossed a border to capture and secure an important railroad routing tunnel at the Polish side....

...and then Hitler receives word from Britain (still in talks with Stalin and not knowing about the Pact) that they will definitely one hundred percent go to war if he invades Poland -- an ultimatum he had not been given before. Almost simultaneously, he gets an apology from Benito, that while he's personally ready to go to war he's sorry but he just doesn't think he can convince the Italian people to do so yet.

On that basis, Hitler calls off the invasion, managing to turn the divisions around, delaying until the agreed start date with the Soviets. (Who then beg off at the last minute that they aren't ready to go after all, y'all start the second World War without us, har har har.) The Polish tunnel is sort of captured, but without follow-up support the spec-ops have to make a break for it, and get captured. They're disavowed by the Nazi administration, naturally, as Slovakian terrorists. The Poles, alerted to the strategic threat to the tunnels, mine them: when Case White finally kicks off, the tunnels are blown first thing.


That said, I find the leftover war-justification mechanics in HOI baffling, too.  O:-)

[Ian C]

Very interesting post that shows how good the new sub warfare is. Includes helpful info for effective Sub warfare and ASW:


https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/england-mp-asw-survival-guide-germans-subs-bring-me-more.1157429/


Some are complaining that subs are overpowered in the early war period. Obviously they have no idea of historical accuracy...

I think one of my favourite features so far is the naval invasion mission. Your task force escorts your invasion force and then stops when they invade and provides shore bombardment.