|
It's an adjustment to go from a game that is about building nations to one about destroying them.
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:12 |
|
|
Alikchi posted:It's an adjustment to go from a game that is about building nations to one about destroying them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:EU4 is about destroying them too. Hell, it's the only one where it's actually possibly to deliberately and actively destroy a nation, and not simply conquer it. HOI4's B-29s say hi
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:EU4 is about destroying them too. Hell, it's the only one where it's actually possibly to deliberately and actively destroy a nation, and not simply conquer it. CK2 allows the destruction of nations, though that is a bit more up to chance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
zedprime posted:I understand it is a third rate citizen but Vicky 2 lets you literally depopulate nations out of spite. podcat posted:HOI4's B-29s say hi
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
^^^ Press E to fill mass grave.Takanago posted:I might be talking a little out my rear end here, but I think it wouldn't be too difficult to make the EU4 sandbox fans happy by giving them some scenario even more open than historical 1936. It would most likely be just a mod, but imagine a scenario where all the major powers are more or less balanced, alliances can form in any which way, and maybe the wars aren't always so total. Yeah, it wouldn't be difficult to make a scenario like that, just somewhat time-consuming to do the grunt work and then balance it. You could probably whip up something basic like "All majors start with same industry/resources, tech, and no one starts in a faction" in an afternoon though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:^^^ Press E to fill mass grave. Yeah, should be easy enough to mod in. But I thought Germany was always head of the axis faction (and I assume the USSR head of the comintern)?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 10:48
|
|
|
Disco Infiva posted:Yeah, but I'm pretty sure "hottest selling series" before CK2 means sold over 10.000 copies I got curious and looked it up on steamspy. CK2 is list as having 1.1 million owners, EUIV 725k. HOI3 is "only" 375k, but I think we need to remember that HOI3 is something of an antediluvian here in that it predates Paradox's move to Steam; I imagine there's a large proportion of owners still with copies from GG. So it looks like HOI sales are comparable to EUIV, at least. A Buttery Pastry posted:EU4 is about destroying them too. Hell, it's the only one where it's actually possibly to deliberately and actively destroy a nation, and not simply conquer it. CK2 allows the destruction of nations, though that is a bit more up to chance. CK2 is if anything easier. It might be probabilistic, but over the course of a game it's going to happen eventually, and it doesn't cost you anything. If you want to play a culturally homogeneous empire in EUIV, build it in CK2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Yeah, should be easy enough to mod in. But I thought Germany was always head of the axis faction (and I assume the USSR head of the comintern)? They currently are in our setup, but they are not fixed factions like in HoI3 - they're just like factions made ingame except they exist from day1.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 11:47
|
|
|
I think what the comments regarding HOI4's "limited timeframe" demonstrate is that what we really need is Victoria 3, with a time frame that extends right through WW2 and the cold war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 11:59
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Yeah a lot of those issues came across as a total failure of understanding the game's scope. Also, Arumba going on about how niche the setting is sounded pretty weird to me. Wasn't HoI the hottest selling series before the runaway success of CKII? I'm not even sure that CK2 was able to beat HOI3's sales regardless - but yes, HOI was very much Paradox's best-selling game/series before the CK2/EU4 juggernauts. Alikchi posted:It's an adjustment to go from a game that is about building nations to one about destroying them. I'd say it's more of a shift to go from a game where you can drop in to any arbitrary position and are supposed to make-do with it, as opposed to a game where you have a singular objective from the get-go and are supposed to aim unerringly for it. There's room to explore Plan Z, or to not go through Stalin's Purges, or to try and extend the Maginot Line to cover the Belgian border, but those are all variations of "WW2 is going to happen, how do I win it?" If Victoria 3 started on August 1 1914, I have a feeling these reviewers would miss the point just as badly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 12:23
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I think what the comments regarding HOI4's "limited timeframe" demonstrate is that what we really need is Victoria 3, with a time frame that extends right through WW2 and the cold war. Rome II: 1250 BC-1453 Victoria III: 1454-1991
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:Rome II: 1250 BC-1453 Victoria 3's Rulers: God-Queen Victoria. Eternal Protector of the British Empire. Lord Bismark, eternal, all-knowing, all-seeing eye of the German Reich Etc, etc, etc
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
Johan Andersson's Civilization: A Paradox Grand Strategy Game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
gently caress it, do an empire builder based on Marx's stages of history.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Johan Andersson's Civilization: A Paradox Grand Strategy Game. You joke but this is basically my dream strategy game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Koesj posted:gently caress it, do an empire builder based on Marx's stages of history. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Koesj posted:gently caress it, do an empire builder based on Marx's stages of history. Wanna play this
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
The problem for HOI for me, as it always has been, is that there's no room to grow in power and feel like you're being awesome without war. And add to that, the game is built mostly around the major players. Why should I play as Turkey? Brazil? Or hell, really third rate countries like Thailand or Tibet? Do I just exist to exist, maybe resist other major powers and that's it? Can I become an early economic power house? HOI just never tickled my fancy the same way every other game in the series has. The limitation of economics from HOI3 made it even more frustrating since, while I never played it much at all, I kept hearing about wasted IC and how there's no point to develop past a certain point and it's just like 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Bel Monte posted:The problem for HOI for me, as it always has been, is that there's no room to grow in power and feel like you're being awesome without war. And add to that, the game is built mostly around the major players. Brazil is actually fun if you have a plan and stick with it. You can pretty viably conquer all of South America as Brazil, or go do some poo poo in Europe if you want. They're about on par with Canada, but with worse tech teams and leaders (but better manpower and a larger already-existing military). Speaking of HOI3, someone posted a few pages back about solving the CTD issue.. how did you do it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Bel Monte posted:The problem for HOI for me, as it always has been, is that there's no room to grow in power and feel like you're being awesome without war. And add to that, the game is built mostly around the major players. Well... it's a grand strategy series about our World War II, and for all its confusedness about complexity equaling depth, these games have had a pretty good focus on what was historically important in that conflict. If you want to broaden the series' scope in time, so that non-major players can exert meaningful influence, then you'll stand a good chance of losing Nazi Germany as a combatant. *Poof* there goes HoI's whole raison d'être. Could the acid test for a broader experience be a game where importing saves from another PDS title is possible? This might mean an expanded Victoria timeline which comes to a natural end by superpower equilibrium - not a fun way to end an empire builder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Could the acid test for a broader experience be a game where importing saves from another PDS title is possible? This might mean an expanded Victoria timeline which comes to a natural end by superpower equilibrium - not a fun way to end an empire builder. Sure seems like it'd be lucrative, though! "Want to find out how it ends? Buy the Victoria 3 -> HOI4 converter DLC and HOI4 and see!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
I don't know how Hearts of Darkness changed things but a major complaint of Victoria 2 was that a World War 1 type of war basically never would happen. If you don't have WW1 I don't know how you can then create a WW2 scenario from that save.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
Usually there are 2 or 3 self-described Great Wars by the end of V2 nowadays  . Though part is just they trigger ~1880, and so there is a fair stretch of the game left for a few more big wars.Though vanilla lacks any system to dynamically partition and dissolve the defeated empires in the Great War, so that contributes to great wars not feeling particularly different from the rest of V2's wars (besides being inevitably even more of a slog). fakeedit: though just because the game calls something a Great War does not always mean it turns out deserving that title.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 08:33
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Well... it's a grand strategy series about our World War II, and for all its confusedness about complexity equaling depth, these games have had a pretty good focus on what was historically important in that conflict. If you want to broaden the series' scope in time, so that non-major players can exert meaningful influence, then you'll stand a good chance of losing Nazi Germany as a combatant. *Poof* there goes HoI's whole raison d'être. I'm not really asking for more of a timeline (though I wouldn't complain), so much as I'd like to have more to do than just warfare. If the earlier start dates in HOI2 are spent sitting around twiddling thumbs and clicking a button once or twice, then that's a problem with the game that I would like to be addressed. That, rather than cut it out to focus on what has been established to be pretty good but needing streamlining and minor improvements, not spergin'. Essentially, I want more fleshed out and meaningful economics and diplomacy/domestics so as to make the warfare part more meaningful and dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 08:41
|
|
|
I mean the game has already been delayed for quite a bit so they can focus on getting everything in. Those just scream feature bloat, although I could see it being added in an expansion after all that warfare stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
ThatBasqueGuy posted:I mean the game has already been delayed for quite a bit so they can focus on getting everything in. Those just scream feature bloat, although I could see it being added in an expansion after all that warfare stuff. For sure, I mean, CK2 didn't have half the features it has now prior to all the expansions if you exclude playing as other religions. EU4 was limited in it's own ways too, but it was an improvement over EU3 in how it streamlined a lot and cut a lot of fat while improving what's already there. I'd like them to do that with HOI. Improve what's there, cut the fat. Then expand it in new ways where it's sorely lacking, like with CK2 (y'all can hate all you want on India, I liked it  ).
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:24
|
|
|
Bel Monte posted:Then expand it in new ways where it's sorely lacking, like with CK2 (y'all can hate all you want on India, I liked it It's also one of our best sellers if I remember correctly, only out competed by Charlemagne and Way of Life. (Though long time ago I saw the numbers, so don't quote me on it) Either way it always makes me chuckle when I see "Ehrmegerd no bady play in India!!!!1", I guess the statistics we collect are lying then. Groogy fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
I like India. It's another part of the world to play in and is different in interesting ways. My only problem with it is that it rarely interacts with the rest of the world beyond swapping a few provinces in Afghanistan with whoever has Persia unless I do it - which isn't such a big problem I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
Will starting a game in 1936 in singleplayer play out at least mostly historically until the war begins? Because didn't absolutely crazy poo poo happen during those 3 years in HoI 3?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
Groogy posted:Its also one of our best sellers if I remember correctly, only out competed by Charlemagne and Way of Life. (Though long time ago I saw the numbers, so don't quote me on it) How many of your customers are in Pakistan/India? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
Archaeology Hat posted:I like India. It's another part of the world to play in and is different in interesting ways. My only problem with it is that it rarely interacts with the rest of the world beyond swapping a few provinces in Afghanistan with whoever has Persia unless I do it - which isn't such a big problem I guess. I agree, it would be interesting if the AI on the west side could sometime go "gently caress this, I'm gonna expand West and conquer these Moslem tribes and make em' all follow Buddha Almighty at the point of my sword!" e: It is also why my next game is gonna be as a Nomad Turkic Tribe that migrates to India and creates a massive horde of Elephants to trample all of the world! Buddha, PBUH
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Could the acid test for a broader experience be a game where importing saves from another PDS title is possible? This might mean an expanded Victoria timeline which comes to a natural end by superpower equilibrium - not a fun way to end an empire builder. That's pretty much what I've observed with previous Paradox Mega-LPs: HOI is going to be about a world war between two or three major ideological factions. Which those are were settled in Victoria or even EU. It's a definite shift from what people might be used to in the other games where the set-up is much more "open-world" and you're not being asked to pick up the world state as a continuation of what went before, but apart from a mod to significantly revamp the state of the world, the question is really here nor there unless Paradox decides to vastly change the period that HOI or Victoria end up depicting. Bel Monte posted:If the earlier start dates in HOI2 are spent sitting around twiddling thumbs and clicking a button once or twice, then that's a problem with the game that I would like to be addressed. That, rather than cut it out to focus on what has been established to be pretty good but needing streamlining and minor improvements, not spergin'. Essentially, I want more fleshed out and meaningful economics and diplomacy/domestics so as to make the warfare part more meaningful and dynamic. I see it as a Catch-22: you need the non-warfare, 1936 part of the game to allow the player to explore alternate development paths with the inter-war armies, and to allow for some reshaping of the minor nation allegiances, or even to allow for an earlier start, but if you make the non-warfare parts of the game require too much work, then you're placing the player in a very difficult position where they either have to continue with the same level of management AND pile on conducting the war on top of that, or simplify the war to keep it manageable, but lose the game's focus as a WW2 grand strategy game as a result. Shimrra Jamaane posted:Will starting a game in 1936 in singleplayer play out at least mostly historically until the war begins? Because didn't absolutely crazy poo poo happen during those 3 years in HoI 3? Crazy poo poo DID happen in the pre-expansion versions of HOI3, when the diplomacy and allegiance/ideology systems were somewhat less working, but it's mostly been fixed as of the latest incarnation of HOI 3. You only get crazy results if you yourself go off the rails, but that's also happened in previous HOIs as well, where Italy trying to conquer, say, Yugoslavia would set off a chain of War Declarations as all bets came off. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 09:45 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I see it as a Catch-22: you need the non-warfare, 1936 part of the game to allow the player to explore alternate development paths with the inter-war armies, and to allow for some reshaping of the minor nation allegiances, or even to allow for an earlier start, but if you make the non-warfare parts of the game require too much work, then you're placing the player in a very difficult position where they either have to continue with the same level of management AND pile on conducting the war on top of that, or simplify the war to keep it manageable, but lose the game's focus as a WW2 grand strategy game as a result.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:An alternative to either would be to have war cut down on the complications of peaceful rule, as factions align to fight alongside each other against the enemy. Basically, before you join a war there'd be all sorts of political wrangling going on, but when the war starts the country would rally behind you and you'd be able to direct the resources of your state in a much more dictatorial manner than usual. And then you get the problem of designing mechanics that end up being meaningless because they turn off when you go to war. I don't think a wargame particularly needs a country's political parties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 11:53
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:And then you get the problem of designing mechanics that end up being meaningless because they turn off when you go to war. I don't think a wargame particularly needs a country's political parties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
HOI is a wargame... with the view that a country's military capabilities cannot be meaningfully decoupled from its industrial potential and the strength of its government. e: That said, no version of HOI to date has succeeded in making the political component an interesting part of gameplay, even in peacetime. KOGAHAZAN!! fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Jun 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:HOI is a wargame... with the view that a country's military capabilities cannot be meaningfully decoupled from its industrial potential and the strength of its government. Are you saying this view is incorrect?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:And then you get the problem of designing mechanics that end up being meaningless because they turn off when you go to war. I don't think a wargame particularly needs a country's political parties. Autonomous Monster posted:HOI is a wargame... with the view that a country's military capabilities cannot be meaningfully decoupled from its industrial potential and the strength of its government. It'll probably also be a bit easier to figure out the need for a deeper political system once the game is actually out, and for that matter, which areas should be focused on. Could be the new features Paradox has added do a fine job at actually making the run-up to the war interesting, in which case there might not be much point. Instead of bolting on a new system they might instead just decide to, much like with EU4 ideas, slowly expand the breadth of the coverage of the national focuses, from the seven major powers to second tier powers, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:12 |
|
|
There's also the fact that HOI4 is being made by post-CKII Paradox, which means that some kind of politically-focused DLC is probably inevitable. Parliaments in EU4 seemed like a pipe dream at launch, and whelp, now we got 'em.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2015 14:23
|
|
