|
Stairmaster posted:I think it's cool that the major nations have unique tank tech trees. There isn't any difference statwise - it's just a picture and some text, same as every HoI game. The interesting new bit is armament companies that modify every vehicle researched in some way.
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 10:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
Verviticus posted:this game i assume fixes the thing where id tell bombers to hit, say, london, and they'd go off and indefinitely bomb some shithole province that shared its territory, right No
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I have one very important question about HoI4: If you play as Germany can you build the utterly impractical and yet awesome super weapons that Germany was working on in WW2? Up to and including the cannon that could fire on England from Europe. No You'll spam infantry and you'll like it
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
cKnoor posted:Last WWW was Daniel playing Poland and not having enough time / resources for anything else. So I don't really think you can look at that and assuming infantry swarms are OP.... And the one before was Hungary where he used nothing but infantry swarms (converting his starting cavalry to infantry was a nice touch), the one before that was infantry swarm Japan, and the one before that was Germany where he used infantry swarms... On Tuesday we got to see France gearing up for infantry swarm warfare though, that was a change of pace
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Groogy posted:He uses tanks as well, but I think most people are referring to his minor game where he simply don't have the industry to even afford tanks. The really damning one is his Germany game. You don't really expect much tank usage from someone playing Hungary or Japan, but you do expect it of Germany. Instead we just got Daniel gleefully mashing on the "deploy 40 more untrained infantry divisions" button. quote:But if you mean to have a majority of tanks No, that'd be idiotic and I'm not sure how you even got that from what you're reading here. The issues I have with the tanks we've seen so far are: 1. Tanks are always far down the list of research priorities. Industry, infantry equipment and doctrine have always been prioritised over it. 2. Infantry equipment takes priority over everything else. Tanks usually get one poxy factory just to keep the line going. 3. Even when researched and built, tank units just get lumped into the infantry mob under the same field marshal, and effectively used as though they were infantry. No use of panzer leader generals to make the most of them, no specific orders to create or exploit breakthroughs. Tank divisions were the "superstar" land units in WW2. If they're not worth the time to research, the industry to build, or the attention to give specific orders to, I think the game is worse than it could be. Tank units are expensive in terms of research, industry, and resources. If they're not also extremely powerful, nobody will bother to build any.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Groogy posted:But he was using tanks? I saw them, specifically also when he was defending against the naval Invasions and fighting in Italy. Just because he isn't training more doesn't mean he doesn't already have them employed. You could also see several times in his production screen that he was producing Tank equipment to supply the tanks in the field. If I remember correctly he had like two lines of production for Panzer II or Panzer III, don't remember exactly. His use of tanks was vanishingly small compared to his use of infantry. I don't want to go back and find quotes or count the divisions, but even Daniel himself was emphasising that he was going with an "infantry-heavy" approach that game. quote:Producing more infantry is his only choice if he wants to be able to fight on equal terms with the USA, they have unlimited IC and unlimited manpower in comparison to Germany. They need to rack up the bodies to build literally walls against them. You're arguing that building tanks is a bad use of industry for Germany in World War 2. I think it's more likely that the tanks in HoI4 are underpowered compared to the trouble (research, industry, resources) that they take to build, so Daniel doesn't bother with them. Gort fucked around with this message at 09:27 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 09:24
|
|
|
Groogy posted:I am not. I am arguing that he is not producing moe tanks because it would require him to switch more production lines from other things to Tanks and lose the production efficiency he currently has. Where "other things" means infantry equipment. Isn't it a little worrying that the priorities are always the same, with infantry equipment always taking the lion's share of production? quote:The production lines he already have is enough to keep his current tank divisions supplied and they are enough to do the moves he wants to do. Tanks are kinda wasted on guarding a coast line from Spain to Scandinavia or invading the USSR (since their reliability would just make too many of them breakdown and his industry would be bottlenecked on that). But they are employed where they actually excel as a task force, which means he doesn't need to build more. He massively increased the number of infantry divisions in his army. Did he even build one extra tank division? quote:Tanks are kinda wasted on invading the USSR This is kinda making my mind boggle. Tanks are perfect for invading the USSR. That's what they're for. The way you're talking it sounds like you think tanks are some sort of super-expensive prestige-weapon, like super-heavy battleships, where you only build them if you have mountains of industry to spare, while if you actually want to fight and win wars you just shovel infantry at your opposition.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Groogy posted:It does not, are you making things up, he switched to a heavy artillery production towards the end game as he realized what he was doing wrong. He was also producing tons of planes and etc. But yes Infantry equipment will always take up a big part of your production lines since it will always be the biggest part of your army. Just looking at one of the videos again, I see he has 82 factories making infantry equipment (with it set up so any future factories he acquires immediately get set to building more infantry equipment) and 5 factories building tanks. quote:Yes because that is how it went... Germany lost something around 70% of its tanks. Of course it is Perfect for invading USSR and like fighting in the enormous swampland in Northern eastern Poland. They had no problems whatsoever with their tanks.... *roll eyes* So, because Germany used tanks in its failed invasion of the USSR, tanks are a failed weapon that shouldn't be used? Nobody tell the Soviets. Gort fucked around with this message at 10:32 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Groogy posted:That's the game where he just taken over and is trying to fix the nation that Jakob left behind. He had massive deficits in his supplies. OK, let's skip forward two videos. Johan builds a far less lopsided force, but Johan loses. Daniel's play just puts me in mind of an experienced player of an unbalanced game who has learned what the "good" unit is and is using that to win.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:I've only tuned into the World War Wednesdays since he played Hungary, but are there any streams where he played a bit further? Japan, I guess? I'd like to see the late game, where I imagine motorized and mechanized infantry play a much larger role. The Germany vs Britain streams run until 1944.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
podcat posted:About armor balance stuff. that germany vs britain game is old now. I think basically every unit stat has changed since then. At that point pure infantry was OP for sure production wise and bang for bucks and by having 3x bigger forces trumps most the ai could do tech wise (at that version manpower was also basically infinite too). That gives me some hope. I did notice you guys had halved the manpower the various conscription laws gave. It'd be cool to see a USA, USSR or Germany game where lots of tanks got used (maybe USSR is the best since they won't have to worry about oil or navies as much as the USA or Germany) to put my mind fully at rest 
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 11:38
|
|
|
Koesj posted:What kind of amounts are you thinking of? 23,000 in 1941?
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
I picked 23,000 in 1941 because it was slightly higher than historical numbers for the USSR. It'd be cool to see a 1941 USSR with 23,000 tanks, is what my point was.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
Koesj posted:That is the number given for the USSR up until the start of Barbarossa though. But like I said, a couple of models might be better suited by the armored car-treatment in-game. An MG and some paper thin steel don't magically transform into an all-conquering tank if you put tracks beneath them. There were only about a thousand each produced of T-38s and T-37s, and this game doesn't model armoured cars. (except maybe in the recon support units) Riso posted:Just comparing tanks is not enough, you need to compare total AFV production between the countries. America and Germany loved their tank destroyers. I'm not sure we're comparing countries, just seeing if historical production is feasible ingame.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 12:40
|
|
|
Infantry was OP at that point in development and they've changed the stats since then.Groogy posted:Meh I'm used to it, everybody on the Internet is a Game Designer. Was just annoying with the: Nice to see you not putting words in anyone's mouth.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
For real, though, tanks are good forever
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
New Poland DDquote:Hello everyone! We are getting close to release now with preorder started a few days ago.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:One thing that worries me about HoI4 is that you need "naval supremacy" to conduct a naval invasion. Naval supremacy is a percentage. I think you need to be 75% in control of a sea zone to do a landing, so it's not like a single destroyer can meander past and prevent the whole thing.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Groogy posted:But the thing is that tanks are a dead end, mechas are the future. 
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Germany generally is the best learning country since nobody will fight you until you're ready for them, and you have an easy progression of wars in Poland -> France -> Russia.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:I understand that artillery is available as an attachment. Yeah, this is fair. The artillery should be WW1-model, but it should definitely be in there.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:How do you know what the default attachments are There are tens of hours of footage of people playing the game on the Internet.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Triggerhappypilot posted:I am concerned that the naval combat is a lot weaker than the land combat. While it's pretty clear that the granularity of combat is a lot bigger than games like War in the East, land combat still looks like it has great potential for maneuver warfare, whereas navy combat looks like it's just "ships gonna fight each other in the same place, better have more ships in one place than the other guy." Well, it's not like that's a bad start for a military strategy. The followups being, "Have better ships" and "Train your ship guys better".
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
The war in the Pacific will be a good test for whether HoI4 is a decent game or not. I love Darkest Hour, but when it comes to naval combat the AI is atrocious, the combat modelling is terrible and carrying out island-hopping campaigns is a slog.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Do people just want no discussion whatsoever or something "What units I might build" seems like a relevant topic for a strategy game
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind assault guns being a tank variant like tank destroyers. Give them more soft attack and less hard attack than tank destroyers, problem solved.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
texasmed posted:tank destroyer = assault gun Not really, no.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Yeah, if you were going to try and approximate an assault gun under the current system you'd just use a tank as the base unit, since it has decent armour and soft attack.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:Are generals more powerful in hoi4 than they were in 2? I never really paid all that much attention to them beyond making sure the big-names went with my armor corps. Each point of skill is a 10% combat bonus. Plenty powerful.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
It bugged me more that Germany was able to complete their entire doctrine tree (including the "desperate defense" stuff like conscripting the disabled and elderly if you so choose) before the war starts.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
See, this is the kind of thing I like to see - infantry advancing in general, motorised and tanks making separate pushes at specific points under generals with relevant bonuses. Anyone else kinda think the game needs a "general advance plan" order for armies that you want to generally advance? It always seems a bit unwieldy when we see players drawing an offensive line on the opposite border of countries they want to invade, and it always ends up with some of the enemy country being left out of the resulting attack. It'd also be cool to be able to tell an army to just garrison my entire country instead of having to select every state separately. Gort fucked around with this message at 19:38 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:It can be more than one though? Can it? I hadn't heard that
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
To the guy who said the wiki has been updated, you weren't kidding. There's shitloads of solid mechanical detail on land, air and sea warfare up that wasn't there before. Including details like how night bombers literally cannot be intercepted without either RADAR or some air doctrines researched. Edit: Although actually reading it, it looks like some typos remain: quote:Also important to note, there is a maximum number of air wings allowed in a combat simulation: 8. With each air wing currently able to support up to 1,000 aircraft, this means there's a theoretical limit to the number of aircraft that can enter a combat simulation: 1,000. Looks like it confirms some elements I'd consider missing, like how naval bombardment cannot of itself hurt anything, it still just provides a combat modifier to land combat already going on. There was something cool about the US Navy's battlewagons rocking up on some tiny Pacific island and wrecking faces, then loving off back to Pearl. Gort fucked around with this message at 18:54 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:They simply imported the Beta Wiki entries. I suppose that means something if you had access to the Beta Wiki before three days ago Top Hats Monthly posted:As far as I can tell, it is. It's designed for the Chinese and I guess other Asian or South American countries I'm not really convinced. A lot of the "mass assault" doctrine choices give you more manpower, which is quite a long way down the list of things China and the USSR need.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Hambilderberglar posted:If I'm reading the land doctrine page right, the mobile infantry and modern blitzkrieg path gives more bonuses than the blitzkrieg and modern blitzkrieg path? Or is the +bonus to Army more powerful than I am realising? The trees give bonuses to different things. Tank organisation seems to be very valuable as well - you seem to only get 1-3 points of that where infantry organisation tends to be 5-10.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:I can't watch streams because I always basically want to yell at people for doing things YES I'm not sure I'll be able to take today's WWW from what people are saying.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Hambilderberglar posted:So what is the Army bonus for? A hq unit only? Or the whole army? The extra speed toward mot and mec sounds really excellent if it doesnt lead to you outrunning your supply train. "Army" means the whole army. There aren't any HQ units. You can't "outrun your supply train" unless you're referring to advancing without support and getting encircled.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
The best wargames have six-hundred-layer simulations of every weapon and piece of equipment a division has while being effectively identical to "US divisions have 12 soft attack, Japanese ones have 10"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
The info I read said that you lose 70% of the equipment of lost men.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
dublish posted:I don't think it was as OP even as Daniel made it look. Daniel's Germany was down to less manpower than Johan's Britain, I think. Daniel just got really lucky that he was able to kick in the USSR's teeth during their civil war or purges or whatever. Well, if it wasn't OP then, it certainly isn't now. They basically halved manpower since then.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2016 20:20
|
|