[HoI3] wish list
You make a good point, but the size of the provinces in hoi2 are many times to large to say all the fighting is taking place from inside the city itself. Most cities, especially those in mountains and swamps, have only one or two avenues of approach to enter in and this makes it extremely difficult for any military regardless if it's an urban area or not. For instance the LA basin covers around 2500 square miles with only three valleys connecting it to the rest of the states. The game engine penalizes an attacker in an urban province but does nothing for the defenders. It's kinda hard to hide a few divisions in and urban area when most are defended by guerrilla tactics and small units. When it comes to moving large divisions through crowded and congested areas, even small cities are extremely difficult; just look at the war in Iraq. Having served in a division headquarters in the military, I can tell 100% every commander looks at the terrain of a city and determines the best approach before making any decisions. Seoul, Korea is the perfect example. That's why I think terrain should add/subtract penalties for different combinations. Something as simple as desert mountain, no cover or place to hide, would be a disadvantage to the defender while a hilly forest would be a nightmare for an armored division. I think it's the combinations that make it interesting and challenging and don't believe that it would add a large amount of memory power to do it.
- king cobra
My original point(not clearly stated) is that you can't complicate the game too much, mainly due to the scale of the game, and the difficulties associated with running everything, this is very evident in multilayer, where the beautiful pause button is not there to use. :-(
PS--I too have served in Iraq, as a lowly convoy rider. :bier:
I'm glad to hear you served your country and returned home safe. That's what every soldier wants.
- king cobra
As for slowdown, I have never experienced any, unless I have other programs running simultaneously. (Pentium IV cpu, 1 gig of ram, 256 mb gpu [apparently people are using new duo core processors and hoi2 isn't running well on them.])
EU3 on the other hand runs like crap, the graphics them selves are subpar, from other 3D displays, and the game itself is far to.......spiratic for me, alliances come and go, tiny nations build huge empires, etc...
You have oil so you could be oil wells up to ten
You have metal so you could build mines up to ten
You have raw materials so you could build whatever up to ten
You have power so you could build power plants up to ten
They wouldn't even need to be physically on the map but in that little box in the left corner. The resources would increase by the total number in each province and the level (upgradeable). It would allow greater flexibility and a more realistic approach to the industrial/economic aspect of the game. Just another thought.
There would have to be some kind of limit on what kind of resources are "possible" in each province.
- king cobra
minite1 schrieb: Yeah, I know they cost little manpower to build, but I'm talking about permanently assigning units to them (garrisoned inside and off the map). Do armored or other heavy units get the same benefit of a fort just because they are in the same province? They shouldn't. I just think it would be simpler if they had to be garrisoned before receiving an benefit for them. The same is true for AA guns. Somebody has to aim and pull the trigger.
The HOI2 wiki provides most of the info I'm referring to. You can find it here. http://www.paradoxian.org/hoi2wiki/index.php/Main_Page
Armored units do get less of a benefit from being on a fortified Provence, and a far greater penalty for attacking one as well.
Does AA cost 1 manpower to produce?, because if it does than that is about 1000 men which seems about adequate, as AA guns don't require massive amounts of men to operate.
I feel like I'm shooting down your ideas, and for that I apologize. :-( Don't let my A-holeness anger you, and make you not want to visit the forum.
- Beiträge: 33
- Dank erhalten: 0
- Punkte: 1.90
Many people who play HOI are like me, from a wargame background and as such we want to see a better combat system, better choice of units, more control over individual divisions, corps etc, etc, etc.
On the other hand some people want it to be more like a standard RTS (which i personally hate).
The thing that attracts players to Paradox games is the fact that they are relatively easy to play and they are very open for the mod community.
If Paradox develops the game to make us wargamers happy it may lose a lot of custom from gamers that don't want that level of detail.
It's a difficult balance for Paradox to keep, but i think the most important point for HOI3 is that the program has more flexibility to allow the mod community to taylor the game in the way that we want it.
My biggest concern is that HOI3 may go the way of EU3 and that would be a complete disaster because guys like Gepard would not continue to mod the graphics etc.
Just a few of my thoughts without going into specific details.
I'm just like you when it comes to a wargame background and I have to agree there are certainly two completely separate sides to the hoi3 topic. Paradox has made a great game/series that most wargamers have wanted for a long time (a complete war scenario that is complex in concept but extremely easy to play and especially mod which adds life to a game one it gets boring. The found a niche in the market with this game and I to am concerned that without improving the concept all they will be making is another hoi2 and that other companies are just waiting to fill the gap left behind. Paradox has the advantage because they have established a well deserved reputation with gamers as a maker of complex yet simple to play and understand concept with an amazing level of detail although the graphics are somewhat lacking, but the ability to mod their games makes up for any shortcomings. I think it allows them to focus more of their time on concept, detail, and ease of play and that's why the series is successful. I'm like you about hoi falling somewhere in between a wargame and RTS, but that's why it is so much fun. They give you the ability to somewhat manage you destiny without over complicating the process.
- king cobra
Curtasy of otacu @ the paradox forums Here
I think FFZ will like this idea helmi_baeh
New Economy Model for HOI3
No longer generic IC. It's a concept too abstract and generic and leads to wacky (although convenient for gameplay and fun) results. Having a generic IC means that Germany can convert all his war production from land units to naval units in a matters of clicks or that USA can start building an army like crazy once peacetime modifiers are eliminated. My suggestion is to replace the generic IC with specific factories (and thus specific IC). This is a little more complicated for the player but not too much (and can help the AI to follow more historical paths) and sure will make the game more interesting.
It's not that much additional micromanagement since the production screen and queue will be the same.... the difference is that there will be 6 different Industrial capacity (for major nations... minors will get mostly 3 IC types). And since there will be no longer sliders for CGoods, Production, Supplies, Repairs, Upgrades.... it could even be more easy to manage.
I thought of 6 different types of factories:
-Construction factories (build: other factories, infrastructures, airfields, naval ports, stockpiles sites, radars, land/coastal forts, AA etc)
-Light factories (build: light equipment mostly used for infantries and less armored land units)
-Heavy factories (build: heavy equipment used for tanks and parts of more advanced units)
-Shipyards (build: naval units)
-Aereonautics factories (build: air units)
-Supply factories (build: supplies and refined oil)
These factories are localized so they are normal buildings in provinces. This means they can be lost and damaged. If most of the german shipyards are built in Rostock or Kiel losing these province or bombing there will severly disrupt naval german construction plans (or even stop them altogether).
Factories build “parts” and joining those "parts" in the production screen will create buildings and units. Every factory has a daily output that gets stockpiled.
For example if Germany has 10 light factories working it will produces 10 “light parts” daily. To build an infantry division you can go to the production screen and select it... it will need let's say 100 lights parts to complete and a minimum of 60 days. The daily “light parts” production will be put into the forming infantry division until it's filled up. When the minimum construction time has been reached and the division is completely filled up then it's ready for deployment.
A unit could need a mix of two different materials. For example a strategic bomber could be built by 100 “aereo parts” and 20 “heavy parts” meaning that countries lacking in heavy industries don't have access to more advanced units until they improve their industrial base (limiting for example Nat China to interceptors/CAS and screeners on the sea).
The fact that now there are stockpiles of “parts” means that you can now even trade them (and simulate american material helps to the allies!)
To prevent unrealistic stockpiling of those “parts” to produce modern units when needed there could be a limit to the stocks (like 2-3 times the daily output). This way if a unit is completed the player has a couple of days to decide the next production without worrying too much about wasted IC during that time.
Producing more than the stockpiling limits will just convert the excess “parts” into money.
Repair/Upgrading is of course done by the same industries that built the unit and the cost is expressed in “parts” too. If there is more output than needed for new constructions the surplus goes into upgrade/repairs. When needed this priority can be reversed.
To build the factories there could be some progressives technology requirements: Construction factories -> Supplies/Light factories -> Aeronautics/Naval factories -> Heavy Industries
Resources are still needed to make the factories work properly
Instead of consumer goods being “manufactured” i'd like to introduce the concept of food supplies as a new type of resource available in the provinces. Those grain filled ukrainian provinces will surely be more “interesting” for the germans.
As for other resources you cannot stockpile food without limits. A nice touch of class would be making the amount of food produced in provinces “fluctuate” according to the seasons representing agricultural productions.
This way you can even starve Germany if they don't manage to get all the food resources they needed from their supposed “lebensraum”.
Food supplies could work like that. You have a stock, a daily output and a daily demand (tied to your industrial size and modified by sliders for example authoritarians nations needs less food). When having a positive food supply all is working normally. Going over the stockpile limit could mean that your population is really rich and happy giving you dissent reduction and maybe a factories output bonus (and or money) too.
When there is a shortage and the food supply is in the negative bad things will happen. You will increasingly lose efficiency in your factories and after a while even your soldiers will fight less efficiently and dissent will start to go out of control.
Free Market – Planned Economy
The eternal dilemma and paradox of Hearts of Irons 2.... Free Market is completely superior despite the fact that a planned Economy should be much more efficient to organize and prepare a nation to war (and this is a wargame).
Because of this i thought of a production bonus to existing factories for Free Market nations but a malus to the production of those factories. A full Free Market nation at peace cannot build war factories at all.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Bulding factories -.8 -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 +.1
fact. Output +.2 +.15 +.1 +.05 0 0 0 0 0 -.0.5
repair Cost +25% +20% +15% +10% +5% -5% -10% -15% -20% -25%
upgrade Cost -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25%
tech. Cost free market economies have higher costs for tech teams
food demand free market economies needs more food supplies
goods money free market economies get more money from selling extra “parts”
Factories Output applies to all non building factories.
This way i think it's more balanced and going planned economy gives you much more control over your war effort since factory building is a key factor. People can even be encouraged to go more “planned” as USA.
Notice that peace modifiers from the democratic/authoritarian slider still apply.
Democratic - Authoritarian
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
peace bulding fact. -.2 -.2 -.2 -.1 -.1 -.1 -.1 0 0 0
peace fact. Output -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 0 0 0 0
food demand free market economies needs more food supplies
Just to connect witht the free market – planned economy slider.
Notice that a full market and full democratic country cannot build war factories during peace times at all.
The peace factories output penalty is to simulate the fact that more democratic countries are less happy with defense spending than authoritarian nations.
A limit to the maximum stockpiles should be introduced to give a meaning to blockades and economic wars. What's the meaning for Germany to raid convoys like crazy if England has accumulated ridicolous resources stockpiles during peace years and could probably make his industry perfectly work with these reserves until the end of the times?
A country should be able to stockpile only a fixed amout of resources tied to its industrial size. Let's say 6 months of global resources usages.
This “limit” could be modified by building “stockpiles sites” (a new building) across the country.
This could really scares countries like Great Britain, Japan and Italy that lacked key resources on the national territory.
- king cobra
FFZ schrieb: I also think ships should not be so vulnerable to land based aircraft.
Carriers should be the best killers of ships, not NAV.
I agree completely. I do hope they fix this.
It is verrrry easy to edit in db--->units folder in the game directory just open the files with notepad or such programs.
For instance I made AT a little more worth building by slightly increasing its hard attack value.
I could do it for you if you like :bier:
- Lt. J.B. Nerhood
If I may expand upon an observation that Mr. Hart made early on in this discussion, the game does stand upon it's own merits and we who play it are wishing for it to be too many things beyond what it is.
Many of the "wishes" suggested in this thread are excellent and it would be nice to see many of them created.
But, . . . .
Let us not forget that what we enjoy is just a game. It is a game created by people who are imperfect and as such, the game is imperfect. Hart said that HOI tries to be too many things. I agree. We also demand that it becomes too many things because we are searching for realism. Well, let the search continue, but let us not ask too much of a game that was meant to be first and foremost, entertaining and a challenge. There's a good game balance inherent with HOI and HOI2. In our search for "realism" let's not try to make the game become a behemoth.
- king cobra
Schmitti schrieb: Oh, god. Do you bring all old topics back now helmi_floet
Thats a big job helmi_mrlightgreen
yes schmitti, here are many interessant threads.
i know that user generally addle (faul), to read more then the first 5 threads.
i do it also in the german part in the last last time, i think this doing works. :guck:
and it is a ever theme, to ask what the iser think about hoi2--Hoi3
my opinion is, because of theat, that paradox go the wrong way, to fell like EA Sports, that this way is false. that is not the way to the profit.
the charm of hoi2 is very great so like it is. and we all give the game much more from this. :guck: