|
gradenko_2000 posted:I just hope that the swapping-models-midstream gimmick doesn't cause too many problems. One of War in the East's biggest remaining flaws is that whatever code they're using for distributing reinforcements/replacements just cannot handle the kitbashed TOEs of German divisions when combined with the dozens of different AFV models and the drat thing tends to poo poo itself in 1943 onwards with unassigned tanks building up in the production pools like so much cordwood. Really? I can't see how you could fail to assign tanks if there are divisions that want them. It seems like you could register every division type with the production lines it needs and then assign a tank randomly (or following some prioritization scheme) every time it gets built. It might be slow, but in the end you can check every division to see if it wants this kind of tank, right? And turns in WitE take a while anyway (I've not actually played, but that's what uPen said in his LP).
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Easily the best part of the dev diary: Didn't HOI3 have casualties? I know DH did... which was neat in a "34k horses lost, 1.2 million infantry lost" way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:29
|
|
Casualties
|
Do casualties mean that Divisions will degrade in combat capacity in the relevant way (ie. a Tank division with no tanks behaves like an under-strength Infantry division rather than 80% of a Tank division)? Or are divisions still going to take casualties to everything proportionately so that doesn't matter?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
I hope they add in the battle descriptions like March of the Eagles too. I kind of hope there's a running total of casualties kept for everybody, though I guess letting you compare the human cost of your virtual war to WWII is kind of perverse. I still want to though...
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
The biggest problem of the WoT-style techtree is already becoming apparent: people don't realize that there is one general techtree, with flavor models for Germany shown. Now they're arguing which German tanks goes where.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Do casualties mean that Divisions will degrade in combat capacity in the relevant way (ie. a Tank division with no tanks behaves like an under-strength Infantry division rather than 80% of a Tank division)? That's the plan, yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
One last thing I didn't understand about East vs West, why was there about six different kinds of helicopter units? Is the difference between maritime patrol and anti-submarine helicopters so important? For 80% of the time period it would just be Sea Kings for all of NATO anyways, in both roles. Frosted Flake fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:That's the plan, yes. I'm officially giddy with excitement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:A potential supervolcano eruption isn't just "some volcano going off" and is fairly comparable to having a bunch of cities vapourised. Such an event would be to the order of tens to thousands (depending on severity) of times larger than the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora which caused significant global cooling and crop failures. A supervolcano is at least in the same league, but it might even take a few of those to approach the hundred teragrams of smoke some recent climate modelings of full-blown nuclear winter estimate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:That's the plan, yes. Okay, that seems really cool. I assume the plan then is to make the battle system complex enough to model disproportionate casualties (i.e. destroying more tanks than infantry) as well?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
podcat posted:Divisions are designed on battalion level, not built on battalion level. There is a big difference in micro effort What! You mean I don't get to do this  every single time I want to make an division? What if I wanted to swap out my 150mm howitzer batallion for some some extra AAA batteries on a handful of divisions? What kind of watered down garbage are you peddling here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
I wondered why there were 200+ posts. On a side note, it's a bit late and all, but... Westminster System posted:Not to mention, there's plenty of people who would find a unique appeal in rebuilding from the ground up, if the game systems would allow them to. It certainly shouldn't be easy and the Game would at least have some limited scope to deal with that, but its certainly a valid form of play that I wouldn't want to take out of someones hands. I'd be interested in a Cold War game, but I'm skeptical about it ever being possible to implement a good one. On the other hand, I would legit pay good money for a Paradox game about rebuilding after Armageddon. Scavenging for materials, recreating lost tech, attempting to rebuild the rudiments of a stable nation, trying to establish new societies based on a complex mix of half-remembered constitutions and plain old warlordism, hell yeah!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
uPen posted:What! You mean I don't get to do this yeah sorry, I am dumbing it down for the $$$'s. No shame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Really? I can't see how you could fail to assign tanks if there are divisions that want them. It seems like you could register every division type with the production lines it needs and then assign a tank randomly (or following some prioritization scheme) every time it gets built. It might be slow, but in the end you can check every division to see if it wants this kind of tank, right? And turns in WitE take a while anyway (I've not actually played, but that's what uPen said in his LP). In that game, every AFV is designated a type, such as a Panzer III is a Medium Tank while a Tiger is a Heavy Tank, and then a Panzer Division's TOE just says how many AFVs of a given type can be accepted. What happens is that Germany produces so many different kinds of tanks that the 1st Panzer Division might fill 2 out of their 50 nominal tank strength with Panzer IIIs, but the game doesn't want to put Panzer IVs in the other 48 slots because the TOE doesn't have space for two different Medium Tank models, but then it also doesn't want to completely replace the Panzer IIIs either because they're still in production and therefore not obsolete, and a bunch of other factors that's never explained in enough detail to the player and the whole thing just stalls out. I'm not really worried for HOI 4 since the way it's been explained seems to be much more straightforward, but it was something that did come to mind. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
The problem with those lovely complicated Grigsby games full of systems is that half of the mechanics seem to be broken at any given time. See also: The year-long period when the most effective tactic against Japanese carriers in WitP was B-17s at 100 feet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:In that game, every AFV is designated a type, such as a Panzer III is a Medium Tank while a Tiger is a Heavy Tank, and then a Panzer Division's TOE just says how many AFVs of a given type can be accepted. What happens is that Germany produces so many different kinds of tanks that the 1st Panzer Division might fill 2 out of their 50 nominal tank strength with Panzer IIIs, but the game doesn't want to put Panzer IVs in the other 48 slots because the TOE have space for two different Medium Tank models, but then it doesn't want to completely replace the Panzer IIIs either because they're still in production and therefore not obsolete, and a bunch of other factors that's never explained in enough detail to the player and the whole thing just stalls out. I have a slight concern that the 'distance' in terms of information between the pros and cons of switching to a new supply line and casualty rates at the front might be too great, but I'm sure this is something that Paradox are on top of. Of course, all of this only really matters if the war against the USSR lasts longer than a single campaigning season (incidentally, 'don't fight in snow/mud' is a thing that HOI3 failed miserably at in comparison to HOI2 and I hope comes back much stronger), which no HOI game to date has managed. Hopefully this is what the whole operation planning thing will address, but if fronts don't stabilise as a norm without a planned offensive going on then no war will last long enough for switching production to be a serious issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Am I the only person who played HOI2 without any interest in my exact unit compositions and was content with "infantry" and "armour" and didn't give a poo poo about what shade of gray my tank is or what rifle my soldiers are using and instead have tons of fun making crazy alt-history WWII outcomes where the Czechs and French team up to conquer germany in the 30's and then go on to smash the soviet union? I played HOI/AoD like any other paradox game, focusing on politics and painting the map my colour and creating a bloc of puppets and enjoying the narrative I was coming up with along with it. If I wanted some super spergy 100% historical wargame I'd play something with hexes and poo poo. HoI3 was boring as hell because it was a bad buggy game, there were too many provinces to manually control things yet the automation was terrible and took all the fun out of the game, plus the politics and peace/negotiation system was bad and took all the fun out of actually waging/winning wars. I've always believed if a system in a game is so tedious it has optional automation it's a bad system and needs to be simplified because invariably in every game that has systems like this, controlling manually gives way better results but is a horrible slog.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I've always believed if a system in a game is so tedious it has optional automation it's a bad system and needs to be simplified because invariably in every game that has systems like this, controlling manually gives way better results but is a horrible slog. This was Paradox's stated reasoning for revamping the trade system in EU4, interestingly. (And then they added the Curia system...  )
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Am I the only person who played HOI2 without any interest in my exact unit compositions and was content with "infantry" and "armour" and didn't give a poo poo about what shade of gray my tank is or what rifle my soldiers are using and instead have tons of fun making crazy alt-history WWII outcomes where the Czechs and French team up to conquer germany in the 30's and then go on to smash the soviet union? I played HOI/AoD like any other paradox game, focusing on politics and painting the map my colour and creating a bloc of puppets and enjoying the narrative I was coming up with along with it. If I wanted some super spergy 100% historical wargame I'd play something with hexes and poo poo. It's not just you. HOI2 was the pinnacle. It's too early to really say but I'm strongly hoping that HOI4 is less of an HOI3-lite and more of an HOI2-plus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
The EvW thread is starting to get ambitious. They're starting to talk about making their own EvW using Unity, and, well...quote:you know what if I find out what language europa engine uses I will try and do cold war game with it, of course don't expect too much as I'm 14 but I'm ambitious and something will come of(of course it will be free)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Tomn posted:you know what if I find out what language europa engine uses I will try and do cold war game with it, of course don't expect too much as I'm 14 but I'm ambitious and something will come of(of course it will be free) TRANSLATED: I literally haven't got a single clue how games are made.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:This was Paradox's stated reasoning for revamping the trade system in EU4, interestingly. Let's say that the Curia completely changes every ten years instead of cardinals constantly popping in and out. Let's give each cardinal three pet issues from a grab-bag of 5? 7? issues for that decade, ranging from issues that are always valid (non-Catholics go to purgatory instead of hell!) to issues that are based on game events (Censure England for enacting the statute in restraint of appeals!) to issues that are dependent on what year it is (Protestantism is a heresy!). Countries can choose to adopt any/all of these ideas, and they give the player different bonuses/penalties. So, for example, "non-Catholics go to purgatory instead of hell" could give the country +10% religious unity, censuring England could give the country +1 papal influence in exchange for a relations malus with England, and declaring protestantism a heresy could give the country +1 tolerance of true faith, -1 tolerance of heretics. At the end of each 10 years, each catholic country gets a certain number of "votes" for a cardinal based on the issues they've picked, with ties being given to the country with more papal influence (papal influence should grow slowly, have no cap, but decrease by large chunks every time a cardinal is won), and some miscellaneous factors, like a cardinal's home province. That way the cardinal minigame doesn't require constant low-level attention, and players care about the issues to some extent because they act as mini-decisions that can optimize the player's country on a decade-by-decade basis. It also gives Catholic countries a sense that they're part of a supra-national religious community, whereas protestant or reformed countries' religious choices are more national in scope. Also for extra fun give countries closer to Rome more influence, and countries with less influence more of a chance to go Protestant/Reformed in order to basically simulate the geographic distribution of the Reformation. tl;dr I would buy a $15 religion DLC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
DStecks posted:TRANSLATED: I literally haven't got a single clue how games are made. At least he's offering to do some coding instead of coming into a thread and HAY GUYS I HAVE A GREAT IDEA FOR A GAME PLZ CODE DIS
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The EvW thread is starting to get ambitious. They're starting to talk about making their own EvW using Unity, and, well...  Paradox, I think you gave up too early on licensing out your engine. I know it's the only engine you have left, but lets see what happens when this guys gets his hands on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The EvW thread is starting to get ambitious. They're starting to talk about making their own EvW using Unity, and, well... Cowcatcher posted:At least he's offering to do some coding instead of coming into a thread and HAY GUYS I HAVE A GREAT IDEA FOR A GAME PLZ CODE DIS
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Speaking of Paradox engines, I was wondering the other day how much longer Clausewitz has left on it. HOI4 will mark the point at which two iterations of the same game series have been on that engine (as much work as has been done on it in the intervening years).
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:I hope they add in the battle descriptions like March of the Eagles too. I kind of hope there's a running total of casualties kept for everybody, though I guess letting you compare the human cost of your virtual war to WWII is kind of perverse. I still want to though... HoI3 already has a strategic overview over all the casualties since game start, I believe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
In case you were wondering what kind of people play HoI and have very strong opinions on the game: quote:Fair enough I don't want to see ugly production screen it might ruin my opinion about it. I always put everything but production under AI control and then I watch it for 12 years and produce things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Speaking of Paradox engines, I was wondering the other day how much longer Clausewitz has left on it. HOI4 will mark the point at which two iterations of the same game series have been on that engine (as much work as has been done on it in the intervening years). EU3 and EU4 are both on Clausewitz so HoI4 won't mark any such point. But ever since CK2 they've been using a much more refined version of the engine so their games since then have been on "Clausewitz 2.0".
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:EU3 and EU4 are both on Clausewitz so HoI4 won't mark any such point. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
From an external point of view I don't see any reason they'd need a new engine in the foreseeable future. It does 3D, has a ton of mod support, and is apparently flexible enough to build both RPGs and strategy games on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:EU3 and EU4 are both on Clausewitz so HoI4 won't mark any such point. Well yeah Ubrik owns original flavour Clausewitz so they have to make the distinction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Paradox, please license and cancel more games so the meltdowns can keep happening. The lost funds can come from the marketing and pr budget, and plus it'll help prune the forums.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Sindai posted:From an external point of view I don't see any reason they'd need a new engine in the foreseeable future. It does 3D, has a ton of mod support, and is apparently flexible enough to build both RPGs and strategy games on. yeah. I don't really see a reason to change engine in the forseeable future. If we switch names it will be because i convinced people "Super Cat Engine" is a cooler name. At the moment it is flexible and modular enough that we can just continuously improve and replace parts as we need them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Please change names to something that can have COD or XBOX as its acronym. Or a really long name that ends up with CASUAL as an acronym would work too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
podcat posted:yeah. I don't really see a reason to change engine in the forseeable future. If we switch names it will be because i convinced people "Super Cat Engine" is a cooler name. At the moment it is flexible and modular enough that we can just continuously improve and replace parts as we need them. If you do change the name, it's only natural to call it Jomini engine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
quote:Finally a HoI game that feels as polished as Vicky2 HoD! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:Paradox, please license and cancel more games so the meltdowns can keep happening. The lost funds can come from the marketing and pr budget, and plus it'll help prune the forums.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
podcat posted:yeah. I don't really see a reason to change engine in the forseeable future. If we switch names it will be because i convinced people "Super Cat Engine" is a cooler name. At the moment it is flexible and modular enough that we can just continuously improve and replace parts as we need them. If, hypothetically, you decided that you wanted to be able to port your games to mobile devices, would that necessitate a whole new engine or could touch interface systems be bolted onto Clausewitz?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:You don't even need to develop anything, just make fake screenshots. Please Paradox; the setting of Equestria is just a rich, untapped gold mine of
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 21:11
|
|