|
That's a very bold step you are taking there. On the whole it seems a positive step forward, nice to see you addressing stockpile concerns in particular.
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
HOI3s supply system tries to be a middle ground between simulation and game, and like many things in HOI3 falls flat on it's face. It tracks and simulates things in high detail, then doesn't give you the tools to manage it at all, because it's trying to be a game, not WitP. The result is retarded situations like the above, or all your convoys routing to Murmansk past the entire Kreigsmarine as the USSR, rather than sailing to Vladivostok, and there is nothing you can do but simmer in impotent rage.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
I was thinking that myself, but I suspect what will happen is Yamato will consume naval equipment of some sort or other/and or repairing her will take equipment, which requires oil. SO you could probably use her as an imperial yacht to your hearts content but can't really fight her without access to oil. Also, weren't we supposed to hear about the beta today? Anyone been told to gently caress off or accepted yet?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Paradox posted:I unfortunately have some bad news for you all. Just incase someone was waiting on tenterhooks for an email. I was waiting on tenterhooks for an email
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Tahirovic posted:They also all lie about this and throw unrealistic numbers around not to mention ignore what it would mean for the households. Their numbers always boil down to calories per day, ignoring what kind of food it is. From what I've seen here in Switzerland seasons are also abstracted which further falsifies the data. Pretty sure we could feed ourselves, it would just require us to stop being whiny bitches and eat like the majority of the worlds population does. So total societal collapse then.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Gort posted:They're rolling the average lifetime supply use of a unit into its build cost. So tanks cost things like chromium, steel, tungsten and a fuckton of oil to make, but don't use up oil once they're operational. It's an abstraction which simplifies the supply system of the game, but does seem a little strange if you consider a single unit, and means that Japan can still sail its fleet around all day even once it has no oil supply - it just can't build any NEW ships. Have they answered yet whether or not you can repair ships without oil? If so it is pretty stupid and OP, but if not your fleet will be non operational soon enough without oil. E: The other edge case I would be slightly concerned by is Germany using it's tanks only to exploit breakthroughs created by infantry and encircle units, but never committing them to a fair fight where they might take significant casualties. Which is pretty much already the best way to use armour in HOI, and if you could then never use fuel after your initial build of tanks as long as none of them died it could be quite unbalanced. Pharnakes fucked around with this message at 10:19 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
Definitely should have written a long rant about Oil and Fuel and Yamato as viewed through the lens of WitP. If only the supply diary had come out first.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:Neither have I in 3. I dunno about Germany so much but what the gently caress did you think the war in the Pacific was all about?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Slime Bro Helpdesk posted:It was, as nominally was Germany's lebensraum- but the actual war decisions really didn't do much in that regard. Japan had Manchuria and barely exploited it - resource wise at least. Diqing oil field wasn't discovered until 1959. Then Japan spends a bunch of energy and manpower fighting a very broad front war against China, and when they start looking at the South Pacific they don't really bee-line to Indonesia to get what oil's there. Similarly, Romania doesn't join the Axis until November of 1940, and it wasn't like Hitler was clamoring to force them in either. Instead, Hitler's focused on invading Norway for...dubious reasons. Basically, little of the war plays out as a focused or even determined grab for resources. Err, seizing the SRA was the entire reason Japan went to war dude. Without it the US embargo would have meant an end to the Adventure in China. The Japanese were well aware they couldn't hope to defeat the Allies in a conventional war, the whole plan was a smash and grab to try and seize as much as resources as possible and hold on to it so stubbornly the allies would say well, shucks, best let you keep some of that while we go beat up on Germany some more. I suppose you could argue that the Pacific war was an inevitable extension of the China gambit and thus was about conquering China not Oil, but that is a very stupid argument. As for why they didn't exploit Manchuko, well the certainly tried to the best of their ability. Post WW2 the geological knowledge behind oil came a huge way. before WW1 there were only really 6 or 7 major oil sources in the world. You might as well ask why Britain didn't exploit Nigerian oil rather than buying from the US, the techniques for finding it just weren't there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Personally I thought my non existent paradox plaza post history a plus, but maybe I was wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
zedprime posted:To be melodramatic, that's almost exactly what I pictured in my head as what sort of tile system to run screaming away from. I should reserve judgement until they talk about how buildings work and why you would or wouldn't use some sort of automation as governors, but seeing a big grid of varying resources is always slightly a bummer because I don't know why you wouldn't have buttons that automate it in such a way that tiles don't even really need to be present. The tiles being there isn't bad in itself, it's an OK way to visualise a planet I think. But I do agree that since it seems there will be a clear optimal development plan for each planet there should be a button that builds it for you, rather than having to work it out yourself for however many planets. I'd also be sad to see the optimal path be monopoly planets.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Well yes, but then it's just optimal to do mine-manufactory-mine-mine-manufactory-mine
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Can the AI handle that though? It's always been easy to pick apart a superior navy using whatever the current flavoured doomstack is. Unless that has been changed you could just build 6 CV 6 DD or whatever proves to be best as Japan and if you pick your fights properly you can take the whole US navy out in a few years.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
The limiter should be colony
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
RTW and M2TW had that system if you ticked a box, and surprise surprise nobody played with it, because the AI would do stupid poo poo in all your other cities.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Factions are dynamic in this, the only set things are Britain, Germany and the USSR being faction leaders at the game start, after that it's all up in the air.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Pretty sure they have said they will have megaprojects, but I don't think there's been much by way of detail yet.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Wait, how the gently caress was Germany supposed to win the war without an extremely unrestricted submarine campaign and why would that not pull the US in?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
I think that's a large part of what is missing from traditional space 4xs, space is just so huge (or hopefully is anyway) and when every empire is perfectly centralised apart from some generic unrest % here and there it just feels so flat. Empires have tended to fall part on our tiny little earth, the idea that a colony thousands of light years away is happy to have no autonomy indefinitely is absurd, never mind a conquered enemy. Fortunately if any studio is fit to tackle this, its pdox. I have high hopes.] I mean maybe not every species should be inclined to fracture, but certainly humans and any kind of ambitious/aggressive race should have problems with keeping distant colonies in line. Maybe a race of super stupid pacifist might not have so many issues, but that would be balanced by them being severely handicapped in many other regards. Pharnakes fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Nov 26, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I have similar opinions about DW- all the stuff under the hood doesn't come out to much. There are a zillion resources but an hour into the game you can get anything you need so there's really no point in having a zillion resources. I like Star Ruler 2- but that game has ship design and I don't care for that aspect of space 4x games. I'm reallly sick of designing ships and the terrible things that come with that decision(Hi GalCiv3). Ok, so nobody does it good then. Automated micromanagement is a funny one, HOI3 style literally just does what the player does but much worse is terrible, I think we can agree on that. But CK2 style feudalism (which is a form of automated micromanagement) works pretty well in my opinion. If paradox can take that experience and apply it in a plausible fashion to the space genre then we could finally have a 4x that represents the inevitable issues of a galaxy spanning empire in a fun and engaging fashion.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
It should have been a turn based hex game on the same scale. Then things would be kind of manageable, it just doesn't fit into a real time game in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
OK, for China maybe, but what about all the befriend other great powers choices, of which there are plenty? Presumably it'll just work in single player, but I'm curious how it will be handled in MP.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
What does that do, replace the Aztecs in sunset invasion?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Pretty much, was probably even dumber at launch.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
SotS was an all or nothing tech tree though, this sounds like you get multiple opportunities to get the more common techs at least, so you are highly unlikely to miss PD all together.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:It wasn't actually. Many techs had multiple potential branches leading to them and their availability got checked for each branch. OK, that's true, but there wasn't usually that many ways to get techs unless I'm remembering wrong. Whereas this dev diary makes it sound like there will be a lot of chances to get techs again, unless they are rare in which case you should go for them if you get the chance at all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Psychotic Weasel posted:Didn't the original Steam page have Feb 2016 on it before it was pulled then republished? Obviously the release date is subject to change but at one point they were aiming for early next year. At one point they were aiming for early last year, so that doesn't really mean anything.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:They did mention you coming up against/finding ancient empire's that have declined and stagnated, that are not doing research anymore. The question that springs to mind, sorta opposite the whole "how to make a empire decline mechanic interesting and fun for the player", is how do you kickstart a stagnated empire? Can the AI do it on its own? On what terms? Obviously it might be bad if one of those big empires went viral just a few time units after you've met them in your dinky 3 planet federation with basic laserz. I'd say coming in to contact with another race is a pretty reasonable criterion for an empire getting it's act back together. Or latest trying.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
In light of Stellaris' AI that wasn't quite so funny after all 
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Hey now, Rome was barely playable and patched to be totally broken 
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Sword of the Stars 2 has more interesting ships and ftl mechanics than Stellaris Whatever else SotS was you can't deny it was interesting. Stellaris is just super bland.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Well, so what is it then?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
Not to mention the AI seems to make a plan for invading every single neighbour it has. You wouldn't be able to see anything on the map but front lines.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Fleshed out WW1 scenario with a few minor mechanics tweaks would be great. If they managed to make a WW2 generator that looks at the sate of the world at the end of ww1 and fast forwards it for 15-30 years it would be fantastic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
WW1 in DH was decent I thought?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
I wonder how much of Stellaris 500k was pre orders? And how many pre orders HOI IV lost from Stellaris fallout.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
My two major remaining gripes with hoi IV are the micromanagement required for aircraft (seriously wtf) and the lack of a simplified terrain mode. It gets really tedious having to hover over each province to see what terrain it is. Well ok, hardly every province but there's more than enough ambiguous cases, at least for me that I really miss simplified terrain. I do use a mod to make the terrain easier to distinguish, but it's shame to have to do that since the default map is very pretty and perfectly fine 90% of the time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
I think the problem there is EU4 is close enough as vanilla that no one really feels the need to mod it too much except the hardcore crazy bloat crowd. It's a real shame to see MEIOU and D&T fall down that rabbit hole, they were by far the best two mods for EU3.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
The main problem with HOI 4 imho is that the air and naval game still hasn't progressed much beyond HOI2 and not at all from HOI 3. And I'd be inclined to argue that the air system is a large step backwards, at least in HOI 2 & 3 you could more or less get your planes to do what you want them to do, albeit at the cost of some micro. Now you not only have to micro your planes in stacks of 30, you then can't even control what they do. It really is pretty poor.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 09:10 |
|
|
It has to be said that HOI3 is, at this point, better than HOI4. Hoi4 still hopefully has a full development cycle to go though so here's hoping. I am disappointed that they have plunged straight into more content without fixing the incredibly broken air system and mildly broken naval system first.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2016 23:27
|
|