|
Frosted Flake posted:As well at the IJN being low on oil and aviation fuel, which is not modelled in HoI 4. Japan only has to build ships, so an oil embargo doesn't impact fleet activity. This is why they had the issue early on where Japan would never declare war on the US, because the AI knew the force differential and didn't care one bit about the oil embargo. I actually wonder if they've decided to model it in a way that will drive Japan to war (-50%IC maybe? or massive penalties to divisions and ships?) or if they just force the AI to declare war despite their system not giving it a reason to.
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Its just gonna be a forced declared war
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Ships require Oil during production and build at a dramatically slower rate if you don't have it. Tanks too.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
wargames posted:Do tell us, I know we destroyed 4 of their carriers. Key points were:
If you're interested in this stuff, i'd highly recommend the book Shattered Sword - it's very readable and gives a great description of all the stuff i just skimmed over.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
e: nvm
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:actually shermans were superior 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
Speaking of historical facts, such as Shermans being superior, it's possible to mod the historical focus weights to make it 100% or 50%, right? Alternating historical, ahistorical, and coin flip campaigns seems like it would be fun.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
Horsebanger posted:Ships require Oil during production and build at a dramatically slower rate if you don't have it. The issue is that Japan already has carriers in '36 and is well on their way to building more. By the time of the embargo in 1940, the carriers are mostly built. Lack of oil only impacts their ability to build more, future carriers. Japan can park off Pearl Harbour for days and operate indefinitely in 1942. The embargo only matters so far as losing carriers at Midway means that replacement ships will take longer to build because of the embargo, which would be the case any way because of building time. So Japan has no reason to attack the USA, UK and Netherlands. Japan doesn't need oil to build a fleet, since the fleet is already built. Japan doesn't need oil to operate since that is free. If Japan does end up in a war somehow, they can operate however they like, and only have to worry about losing ships, the replacements of which would not be ready in time for the war effort with or without oil.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
I'm not super happy with ships needing no oil either, but I don't think the argument that Japan has no reason to go to war is particularly relevant. If it's AI Japan just have an even to force war when oil reserves reach x, and if it's player Japan then you will go to war anyway because why the gently caress would you play HOI and then not go to war. My concern is that with blobbing and careful micro Japan can keep his fleet alive and operate with no penalty indefinitely, which is silly. I mean it's not like the US will have difficulty out producing Japan anyway I suppose, but it will make it pretty trivial for the Japanese player to get naval dominance against the AI, and probably even against other players. I could be wrong but I suspect victory in naval combat will go to who keeps the most attention on the fights and runs away and repairs before he can loose any capital ships. Japanese player would have the advantage of caring only about the pacific whilst the British and US players will have to be giving attention to the other side of the world as well.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 12:18
|
|
|
I'm sad Nationalist China doesn't have a focus tree yet. 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 12:28
|
|
|
Just imagine Guadalcanal if the IJN didn't have to sit in port at Rabaul. Naval invasions require control of sea zones and the IJN can stay out to sea indefinitely. I understand this system with land units - it was probably harder to keep a Tiger or Panther running than to supply fuel - but it doesn't work for ships. In their lifetimes, ships consumed many times their own weight in fuel oil. The ships existing in the start of the game are 'free' to use from 1936-46 and only cost you if you lose them, which would be costly anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 13:10
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I'm not super happy with ships needing no oil either, but I don't think the argument that Japan has no reason to go to war is particularly relevant. If it's AI Japan just have an even to force war when oil reserves reach x, and if it's player Japan then you will go to war anyway because why the gently caress would you play HOI and then not go to war. One of my straight up complaints about HOI3 was that there was no reason to fight for anything - it was just 'welp I guess it's time to start the war, lets see how much of the map we can convert'. The problem with that isn't just that it's narratively unsatisfying, a war without objectives is fundamentally boring. 'Because it's the game' isn't a sufficient answer, without objectives there can be no strategy, and with no strategy you aren't playing a strategy game - you are just watching things happen.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
That's a fair criticism I suppose, but I don't remember much reason to fight in any of the HOI games beyond the scripted events forcing you too/just because. Or do you mean you didn't like HOI3's attempt at a sandbox threat system to lead to war? I don't think anybody really liked that, certainly every mod I've tried has road to war event chains to get something approximating historical declarations.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I'm not super happy with ships needing no oil either, but I don't think the argument that Japan has no reason to go to war is particularly relevant. If it's AI Japan just have an even to force war when oil reserves reach x, and if it's player Japan then you will go to war anyway because why the gently caress would you play HOI and then not go to war. Wasn't there some talk that ships needed oil to be repaired? An embargoed Japan would pretty quickly run around with a lot of ships at 50% health or have to keep them in port while slowly repairing them.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
I've never seen a dev confirm that, but I hope it is true. It's the idea i've had in my head for mostly solving the problem without over complicating the game back to HOI3 levels.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Ive also heard that you need resources + equipment to repair
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
As a newbie that only played bits of HOI2, how will tanks differ from one country to the other if a medium tank technology is the same for everyone? Is it going to be through National focuses, doctrines and advisors bonuses? I'm just curious of how much it is possible to specialize in one field.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:As a newbie that only played bits of HOI2, how will tanks differ from one country to the other if a medium tank technology is the same for everyone? Is it going to be through National focuses, doctrines and advisors bonuses? You can tinker with AFVs by spending land experience points to improve them in various areas https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/hearts-of-iron-iv-developer-diary-8-experience-and-variants.794277/ Enjoy fucked around with this message at 23:57 on May 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
They come with the same base stats but you can use field/combat experience to pick one facet of your tank/plane/ship design to improve but usually at the cost of something else about it. For reference:  Some things may have changed since this was last covered though.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:
They've since confirmed that Rome II isn't even getting made.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
I'm sorry for getting everyone's hopes up again; it was the first picture to come up in Google. Here, I found another one that shows slightly more detail: 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Once the t-34 tank came out German and Soviet tanks were pretty on par. Judicious use of sloped armor made Soviet tanks tanks have similar toughness despite having less actual armor and weaker engines.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
This is pretty cool. Until now I thought you could only make variants of ships.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
The Germans can also create variants of their Übermensch once you get far enough into the tech tree.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:The Germans can also create variants of their Übermensch once you get far enough into the tech tree. Yeah you need to unlock Gene Tailoring
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
You joke but the time is ripe for Steppenwolfe 2.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Yeah, in one of the streams they should tank customization. Same idea. No fear, Naziphiles! You'll be able to construct your hunks of armour that break down whenever the move more than 10 feet in a straight line.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:So basically there isn't a chain of command? Fair enough, it was a bit of a mess in HOI3 although I didn't find it that bad, it was a nice idea at least. I know this is back a bit, but the HOI3 chain of command really suffered because the game didn't massively reduce or even eliminate the amount of division-level micromanagement possible at the same time. When the player can control every division directly, the simplest solution to all sorts of problems with the chain of command is that the player should control every division directly. Except for distributing bonuses it's completely flat in practice, undermining any reason to have it in the first place. If it's there, it doesn't benefit from being more complex. So having a more barebones system in HOI4 makes sense if there's still micro. I hope future expansions reduce the need for micro, but the possibility is definitely going to remain.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:I'm sorry for getting everyone's hopes up again; it was the first picture to come up in Google. See this is what I was wondering, will AI focus on well, historical, focuses for their units? Will the Japanese put more points into engine while ignoring weapons for example?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
Triggerhappypilot posted:That's not at all fair, there was tons of naval combat after Midway. While it's true the Japanese carriers were never again quite as potent a threat, you have to remember that they were still able to sink the Hornet months after Midway, leaving Enterprise as the only operational American fleet carrier. The surface fleet was still a fairly potent weapon, too. The Japanese sunk 4 relatively modern heavy cruisers during the first battle of Savo island (which was a night battle) for the loss of none of their own. It wasn't until mid-1943 when the first Essex class carriers had been deployed and the US Navy had finally gotten its poo poo together that the Japanese fleet ceased to pose a significant threat to the American surface fleet. And that speaks more to a failure of industrial planning + pilot training and useless boondoggles like the Yamatos than poor naval strategy They had plenty of poor strategy, too.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
A concise depiction of the HoI3 chain of command system
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:They had plenty of poor strategy, too. Was there anyone involved in World War 2 that didn't have incredibly poor strategy that got a lot of people unnecessarily killed?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
canadians maybe? the things that got them killed in droves were all someoneelses idea.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
RedFlag posted:Yeah, in one of the streams they should tank customization. Same idea. No fear, Naziphiles! You'll be able to construct your hunks of armour that break down whenever the move more than 10 feet in a straight line. what about Francophiles >.>
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:what about Francophiles >.> I'm sure the option to surrender has been in the escape menu since early development.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Was there anyone involved in World War 2 that didn't have incredibly poor strategy that got a lot of people unnecessarily killed? Denmark surrendered right away, so in a lot of ways they had a very good strategy.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
TeenageArchipelago posted:Denmark surrendered right away, so in a lot of ways they had a very good strategy. Although that still got a shitload of them killed.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Was there anyone involved in World War 2 that didn't have incredibly poor strategy that got a lot of people unnecessarily killed? Truman.  
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Nitrousoxide posted:Once the t-34 tank came out German and Soviet tanks were pretty on par. Judicious use of sloped armor made Soviet tanks tanks have similar toughness despite having less actual armor and weaker engines. "On par?" The T-34 was far and away much, much, much more powerful than anything the Germans fielded in Barbarossa, not to mention the KV. The massive losses suffered in 1941 had little to do with the quality of Soviet tanks, which was excellent at the time and they continued to innovate far more than Germany did, and I say this as a big fan of fascist metal boxes. On an individual basis you had stuff like a single KV-2 and five KV-1s stalling entire tank formations until they ran out of ammunition, then continuing to press forward and literally drive over PaK 36s and crush them. What wouldn't this thread be without some tank sperging now and then.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
'41 the t34 was a piece of poo poo. It couldn't go 20 miles without breaking down and a 2 man turret no radio is a recipe for complete uselessness. Just because it could bounce a pak 36 shell at anything over 500 meters doesn't mean it actually contributed anything to the war.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 08:34
|
|
