Hearts of Iron IV

[sandman2575]

Hey Ian -- I take it that also means Pdox has boosted Subs survivability? They've been pretty much useless since the day the game came out. I would send out my swarms of U-boats into the Atlantic in 1939 and the entire fleet of 'em would be wiped out by early 1940. They were fine taking out merchant vessels, but if they met with *any* enemy naval vessels, they got obliterated in short order. (It also really irks me that unescorted capital ships have ASW ability...)

It got to the point that as Germany, I stopped building any navy. Just concentrated on Naval Bombers to protect my shores.

[Ian C]

Hey Ian -- I take it that also means Pdox has boosted Subs survivability? They've been pretty much useless since the day the game came out. I would send out my swarms of U-boats into the Atlantic in 1939 and the entire fleet of 'em would be wiped out by early 1940. They were fine taking out merchant vessels, but if they met with *any* enemy naval vessels, they got obliterated in short order. (It also really irks me that unescorted capital ships have ASW ability...)

It got to the point that as Germany, I stopped building any navy. Just concentrated on Naval Bombers to protect my shores.

It's all changed for the better. Some are saying that subs are too powerful, but the link to the p'dox thread I posted suggests that they are working historically and some players just don't know how to cope with that.

[jamus34]

I read somewhere that it was better to send subs out in 2-3 boat H/K groups rather than a mass fleet.

No idea the truth in it but what I heard.

[sandman2575]

I used to send them out as single-Uboot flotillas (...so much for the wolfpack doctrine). Didn't matter. Even with one Sub assigned to a vast ocean area, it was only a short matter of time before an Allied flotilla tracked down and killed the sub. And this is in 1939/40... the fact that it took some years into the war to perfect ASW tech and tactics was clearly lost on the Pdox dev crew...

I very much hope this is really changed with MTG...

[Ian C]

Official Tutorials

I used to send them out as single-Uboot flotillas (...so much for the wolfpack doctrine). Didn't matter. Even with one Sub assigned to a vast ocean area, it was only a short matter of time before an Allied flotilla tracked down and killed the sub. And this is in 1939/40... the fact that it took some years into the war to perfect ASW tech and tactics was clearly lost on the Pdox dev crew...

I very much hope this is really changed with MTG...

I think it has.


Beta patch out later today and official one next week:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-dev-diary-mtg-post-release.1158208/

[FarAway Sooner]

The questions about U-boat tactics and survivability are interesting.  What's really revealing there is that, while U-boat doctrine flexed and changed a couple times during the war, the much bigger factor of change was anti- U-boat tactics.

Airpower was critical in reducing the effectiveness of U-boats, because it kept them under water, which made it MUCH harder to position themselves for a convoy attack.  Convoying doctrine has gotten as much love in the literature as air power, but there were lots of other pieces to the puzzle.  Aggressive use of coastal patrol craft was a great, cheap way to keep U-boats out in the deep sea, and away from concentrations of merchant shipping.  Radio discipline for freighters in distress, total shoreline blackout conditions, and effective control of navigational aids was also a big thing.

One great book that talks about the Americans' disgracefully and disastrously slow embrace of all these lesser tactics is Operation Drumbeat.  2/3 of the book is told from the German viewpoint, primarily through the eyes of one U-boat commander who led multiple missions in US Coastal Waters in early 1941.  But the author interjects episodes and insights from lots of other perspectives as well.

All that stuff seems like it would be ripe for a branch of the US focus tree, but I haven't played the game enough to know if it's already there.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

The Focus Trees are starting to get a bit too complex as it is, I don't think they'd get so granular on something as highly specific as that, unless it's bundled together in a single Tree item under the Navy branch.

That said, something like this could also fit under the general 'Naval Doctrine' mechanics which is open to everyone, although a Focus Tree item could give them a research bonus to the relevant Doctrine path to signify the Americans finally bringing in dedicated anti-U-boat tactics.

[sandman2575]

I agree with you, Joe, about the Focus Trees. I don't love them, and I really don't think the devs have fully acknowledged the fact that they make other aspects of the game unnecessary -- diplomacy especially.

By a country mile, HOI4 is the game in my Steam library that I've poured the most time into -- over 500 hours, if you can believe that (part of me can't). I have basically *never* in all that time bothered with diplomacy. It's pointless, because the Focus Trees allow you to manipulate the diplomatic context far more efficiently. Playing as Germany, why should I bother spending Political Power trying to influence Austria when I know the Anschluss trigger is there in the Focus Tree? Why should I influence Hungary and Italy when I know they will join the Axis when certain conditions are met? Basically, if you intend to follow a reasonably historical trajectory, you can just use the Focus Tree and ignore the rest. It also makes many of the Cabinet appointments pointless. Why do I need a diplomat to get a buff to influencing nations? I don't. I also don't ever need any of the political buff Cabinet options because I've never had to pay any attention to internal politics. I actually like the new Congress mechanic that got introduced with MTG -- it's the first time I've had to pay any attention to politics. 

HOI4 also badly needs some sort of enhanced intelligence or espionage mechanic. NOT the idiotic mechanic used in HOI3, which was a tedious game of 'make sure I have 10 spies in a country for no very obvious benefit".  I'd actually like for there to be an option to greatly enhance fog of war, and to have to develop an intelligence-gathering infrastructure that would allow you to get decent information on the enemy.

Anyway, I don't necessarily love the Focus Trees, but I wish the devs would get around to recognizing how it has shifted gameplay away from how diplomacy used to be handled, and improve it from that standpoint.

[FarAway Sooner]

Joe, that's fair.  I've only sunk 50+ hours into the game, but the Focus Trees remain fairly arcane to me, in part because I'm trying to figure out how the underlying game mechanics work before I worry about how to influence those mechanics via Focus Trees.

That said, a lot of the Focus Tree stuff looks kind of generic to me, especially on the naval side.  The disgraceful state of US anti-sub doctrine at least has some precedent in the actual history of WW II.  Still, I get your point.

[Ian C]

I actually like the new Congress mechanic that got introduced with MTG -- it's the first time I've had to pay any attention to politics. 

How are you enjoying the rest of the game? By the way - the beta patch also improves certain things in the game considerably.

[ArizonaTank]

The AI post MTG is still a toss up so far for me.  However, I can say that MTG makes playing Japan much more interesting...and that is no small feat. 

[sandman2575]

How are you enjoying the rest of the game? By the way - the beta patch also improves certain things in the game considerably.

I started up a USA campaign a couple of nights ago -- it's only late 1938, so I'm not really close to getting pulled into any fighting. Still mired in the Great Depression.

I *think* I like the new naval mechanics. I had initial hopes that they would cut down the micromanagement considerably, but I'm finding that's not the case. They do make some aspects of management easier, but if you have a large fleet, it's still kind of a pain in the a$$ to manage everything.

I definitely have more things to do at least in the pre-war years, busy training fleets and air units. It's not thrilling, but it is satisfying to train-up your units.

I started fiddling with the ship designer and I do like what they've done here. I don't know how much real impact design changes will have. I have a worry that torpedoes may be overpowered and that spamming torpedo ships is going to become necessary, but I hope not.

I'm looking forward to seeing the changes in ship combat. The new 'searching for enemies' mechanic sounds cool.

I also really, really hope submarine warfare resembles something close to historical reality.

Ian -- what are you happiest about with the beta patch?

[Ian C]

Ian -- what are you happiest about with the beta patch?

There are quite a few important bug-fixes and additions to the UI that make things easier such as the improved Task Force editor: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hoi4-ironclad-1-6-1-beta-hotfix-checksum-cff6.1156489/

I agree with the points you make, although I enjoy micromanaging. I've been playing the UK since '36 and I'm currently up to August '40.  Playing the UK is quite an experience after this patch and DLC. I'd say that it is the one nation that has it all on it's plate from the start. I'm just getting the first Government In Exile forces through with some generals -I forgot about this feature and it's pretty neat.

I've started a few other games to quickly try the other major nations- Germany in '39 and the U.S. in '36. One thing that is immediately noticeable is how much the game changes have really made the other nations quite unique.

[malize]

They really needed to move the whole ship design/update mechanic to its own screen.  Sometimes the reasons are absolutely arcane as to why it won't recognize a ship update as valid for the older class of ship it was based off..which ends up costing extra naval xp to sort out. 

Really, a simpler setup like you see in games like Stellaris (for example) where you can clearly setup the class modifications and new hull/classes etc. would've been better than simply attaching the new mechanic in the same location as the previous "variant" mechanic.

[HoodedHorseJoe]

I agree with you, Joe, about the Focus Trees. I don't love them, and I really don't think the devs have fully acknowledged the fact that they make other aspects of the game unnecessary -- diplomacy especially.

It's funny you should say that because it's something I've been wondering about for at least a couple of years now, and especially since Death & Dishonour. Had a conversation with a write about it just this week. Personally, I don't mind the Focus Tree as a way of deploying a narrative, but I think it now needs a re-work in terms of how it functions. Like we fear - it makes things like manual Diplomacy rather pointless now.

I also get wound up whenever I'm forced to research something I know I can get a bonus for if I'd just completed the relevant focus on time, and I think there definitely needs to be some kind of assistance in terms how best to navigate through the tree. Like Civ recommends what tech to go for next, there should be a FT recommendation.

I'd personally like to perhaps see some kind of separation and/or allowing you to pick multiple focuses at once. I'd say there's now three broad groupings:

* Political & Narrative
* Infrastructure & Economy
* Military

I think you do need to be able to do more than one at once now, otherwise you risk falling behind  in too many areas at once. I was doing a democratic Germany playthrough recently and wanted to go down the Central EU Alliance route, but all my FT candidates for joining kept joining another already existing faction as wars kept breaking out. It's kind of annoying.

Joe, that's fair.  I've only sunk 50+ hours into the game, but the Focus Trees remain fairly arcane to me, in part because I'm trying to figure out how the underlying game mechanics work before I worry about how to influence those mechanics via Focus Trees.

That said, a lot of the Focus Tree stuff looks kind of generic to me, especially on the naval side.  The disgraceful state of US anti-sub doctrine at least has some precedent in the actual history of WW II.  Still, I get your point.

As much as that makes sense on paper, you might want to accelerate your learning of the FTs simply because at the moment it's woefully inefficient to do most things outside of the FT system now. Alliances, Economy Military... you can get so much from the tree that it actually replaces certain, rather than 'influences' them.