Hearts of Iron IV - The Ultimate WWII Strategy Game

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Yea the provinces there do. ICE already has set up a region limit that has pretty much the AKS envisioned borders in the East.

Also, I think you mistook the IKL for Lapua Movement. IKL was the soft end of the far-right in Finland (basically the political wing of AKS), who stayed strictly within confines of the law (and actually managed to have people in the parliament too), despite being distinctly fascist. They got shut down only in 1944 as part of the peace treaty (in spite of Kekkonen's attempts to get rid of them earlier).

Generally when it comes to adding Estonia to the loot for Finland in case of victory in the East is mostly just purely a matter of gameplay first. Estonia and Leningrad are pretty much the only real loot in the area, and at least somewhat in the distant realm of possibility (AKS and boys certainly would try to lick Adolf's boots about the subject after Kola peninsula and East Karelia, given how long Estonia had been seen as a logical part of the Finnish state by Fennomans previously). The alternative would be adding resources, Ld, IC and manpower here and there over East Karelia and Kola Peninsula (without any alterations, the area is worth exactly 1 IC as loot), so overall it's just more expedient and sensible in the grand scheme of things as it provides a more tangible reward within the immediate neighbourhood. A more important element overall would be addition of Estonian generals and ministers, but that's one of the weaknesses in HoI3 scripting (as far as I know, there's absolutely no way of having leaders that would be added later when certain conditions are met).

 

[GarfunkeL]

Leaders have a start date, before of which they remain inactive. It's how Rommel only appears in 1939, because he was a colonel before that. That might help you.

And yeah, I did mix up IKL and LaLi. However, IKL only had 1 minister through the period: Vilho Annala as the traffic/public works minister in Rangell's cabinet. Their importance was very marginal. Though a German victory in East would most likely increased their support, somewhat, Kokoomus and the Agrarian Party would have remained the strongest ones, with SDP coming third. Also, Kekkonen wouldn't amount to much - he staked his career on being anti-war and pro-USSR, but if Germany would've won, he would have been sidelined completely.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I was referring to Kekkonen's beef with the IKL, which said party really liked to bring up as their victim card during the war. But yea, currently what I set up is an event that fires every now and then (12 month mean time), where after German victory in the East the event serves to give some agency in influencing Finnish politics through the whole Axis participation thing favouring right-wing parties (in the form of event having a multiple choice to increase organisation and popularity). I'll have the AI random chance favour Kokoomus then.

Anyway, the problem is not of that sort. It's that there is no activate leader/minister command in HoI3, so you can't have set of generals that come into play through means alternative to time passing. Ie, in HoI3 the Austrian generals in the Wehrmacht are always there, not added by the Anschluss event. One of the biggest most-wanted features for HoI4 I have is the addition of random-generated generals on top of the famous historical ones, so you no longer have to worry about this nonsense (that many countries just don't have ENOUGH leaders).

EDIT: Phew, just finished a post-Barbarossa decision for Germany to create Reichkoms anyway, along with making the borders a bit more arbitrary-crazy-racial-policy-population-transfer-ey. Also added more ministers to each of the Reichkoms (hoping that just adding RKX in front of the ID number is enough for the game), though those won't be tested anytime soon since minister data is save-specific for the most part.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

DELICIOUS

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Hallelujah, they've finally grown enough balls to have a better flag for Germany!

 

[Calapine]

I have seen this game before it and it was called Xenonauts – Strategic Planetary Defence Simulator!

 

[Berekän]

That map is sexy as fuck. Too bad I won't be seeing it much. No political map screenies yet?

 

[Whisky]

Oh, nice map! Germany's flag is better too! Still going to have to mod the Swastika in, of course.

 

[Space Satan]

I always liked Unholy Alliance option. Too bad AI got into stupor with it, unable to handle unexpected fronts.
Anyway, the thing that ruined HoI3 for me was godawful belligerence mechanic. Effectively turning the game into the horrible mire and tedious shit. You could not invade, could not attack, could not do anything without waiting half the game until you increase your Bel to attack some pathetic minor.

 

[Space Satan]

Exactly - text editing is worthless if AI cannot respond to it. It's like adding traits to your caracter via console in CKII. Even if you edit bel for all AI nations it will just break the game because "AI isn't built to respond to this"
About that map screenshot and IC. They got three sections, which is what? Owned-building-occupied?

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Funny the map is still completely uninspiring and will now tax your system twice more.
More gimmick effects and small 3D reliefs that will make your fps drop to 20! Yay.

Why can't the map be a beautiful 2D painted one?

 

[suejak]

Does anybody actually like Hearts of Iron games?

 

[Whisky]

Yes.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Does anybody actually like Hearts of Iron games?

If the game ends up more about macro strategy than the micro military clusterfuck that is hoe3 than I'll like it. If the AI can handle general orders, while you decided which direction is pertinent to follow than it could be interesting, as not a lot of games do that.

We didn't need another WW2 games. Though at least it does fit this style of game design than The renaissance or the medieval age. And I don't get disappointed as how the map and graphics don't really make me appreciate the most aesthetics of these periods, with next to no buildings or stylistic stuff, and a google earth tier map.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Does anybody actually like Hearts of Iron games?

Yes. Don't listen to the dirty console peasants whining about micro. True PC Master Race played Avalon Hill, War in the East and Pacific War back in the day, and by god, we liked the obtuse interfaces, clunky game mechanics and lack of graphics! We had to ski ten miles to school, uphill, both ways, and we spent that time thinking about our next turn actions, as it took the school-day for the game to calculate AI actions!

Although like you mentioned the game's AI isn't built to respond to anything besides a prescripted WW2 on rails so the rest of the world won't give two shits or respond in any way to you going on a rampage attacking random countries. So there won't be any real challenging gameplay in doing so.

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

 

[Calapine]

I have to say TFH and all prior patches convinced me of the game. My first impression was on release-day and the sour taste stayed for years.

Does anybody actually like Hearts of Iron games?

Yes. If you like Wargames (not RTS!) there is a good chance you like this.

Although like you mentioned the game's AI isn't built to respond to anything besides a prescripted WW2 on rails so the rest of the world won't give two shits or respond in any way to you going on a rampage attacking random countries. So there won't be any real challenging gameplay in doing so.

Not true. Being aggressive (especially as Germany) nets you an early war, earlier entry of the US into the Allies, etc...

What the game is not perfect at is handling surrender conditions once things go very ahistorical. It's generally very hard to get someone to surrender...the three factions (Allies, Axis, Comintern) fight until the end. Which was indeed true for Germany, but I am pretty sure the Churchill would have been on his way out had the war turned sour for the UK.

HPP (Historical Plausibility Project) improves on this greatly and introduces some random elements as well (slight chance France would have stood up for the Chechs at Munich, Poland folding...), so it's great if you are a What-If player. Personally I don't like some other (gameplay) changes of the mod, so don't use it, but the first-mentioned aspect of it is really well done.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Me, I tend to just mod in things as I go. For example, my current ICE (which I use because I like it, and have used since Semper Fi; I'll give HPP a go once they get out of beta for the current version) campaign I've added in a few details around things like Axis puppet UK putting Edward VIII on the throne if he's not head of state, along with improving (gameplay-wise, the states are now roughly more functional instead of just Kaukasus and Ostland being for show with Moscow being just another axis major power; now the IC/resource distribution is more equalized so none of them are particularly powerful or powerless; also accounting for the possibility of the Reich granting Estonia and Ingria to Finland) the Reichskommissariats creation in Western Russia (which can also be done after winning the war regularly) along with enabling more ministers for each of the states. Another thing I did purely for teh lulz was make a decision to let Finland woo Sweden to come along the Axis-train after Soviet defeat, where Sweden's reactions choices include the option to tell Germans to let Sweden administrate Norway in exchange for formally joining the Axis (I'm actually surprised Paradox hasn't included this option themselves).

I always liked Unholy Alliance option. Too bad AI got into stupor with it, unable to handle unexpected fronts.
Anyway, the thing that ruined HoI3 for me was godawful belligerence mechanic. Effectively turning the game into the horrible mire and tedious shit. You could not invade, could not attack, could not do anything without waiting half the game until you increase your Bel to attack some pathetic minor.

Then open up the text file of the country you are going to play and set the neutrality to zero. Takes 30 seconds.

I'd like to point out you don't even need to open a text file. Just type in noneutrality in the console, and bam you're instantly down to 0% neutrality.

Although like you mentioned the game's AI isn't built to respond to anything besides a prescripted WW2 on rails so the rest of the world won't give two shits or respond in any way to you going on a rampage attacking random countries. So there won't be any real challenging gameplay in doing so.

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

The Allied AI is also pretty good at building up and maintaining its forces overseas in response to the war going off-rails. Currently in the campaign 1944-1945 was a year of non-stop slaughter in Persia and Syria when the Wehrmacht and its allies faced off against Americans and British there.

 

[CarnivalBizarre]

Vaarna, HPP has been so behind the last year, I don't think they will ever get a good version running again. Black ICE is good, although I don't really like the focus on more stuff all the time, they do great work in rebalancing things every now and again. Also, it is the most worked on mod these days besides the germany only mods.

 

[Raghar]

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

I thought Churchill would try to screw up Germany even when they would went peaceful.

 

[Average Manatee]

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

Not at all. The AI (as of the latest expansion) only reacts to threat levels of factions. Neutral nations can have hundreds of threat and never get DoWed (although if, say, Japan's threat puts the US at 0 neutrality then the US will still join the Allies and attack Germany even if Japan is neutral). It might have been different in earlier versions, I'm not exactly sure how the scripts worked back then.

It does react well to threat as long as you are in a faction though.

 

[mondblut]

I thought Churchill would try to screw up Germany even when they would went peaceful.

One may dislike Hitler's system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations... We cannot tell whether Hitler will be the man who will once again let loose upon the world another war in which civilisation will irretrievably succumb, or whether he will go down in history as the man who restored honour and peace of mind to the Great Germanic nation.

Not to mention he was out of power until the war began.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

Not at all. The AI (as of the latest expansion) only reacts to threat levels of factions. Neutral nations can have hundreds of threat and never get DoWed (although if, say, Japan's threat puts the US at 0 neutrality then the US will still join the Allies and attack Germany even if Japan is neutral). It might have been different in earlier versions, I'm not exactly sure how the scripts worked back then.

It does react well to threat as long as you are in a faction though.

This is the case only during WW2 itself. Allies will declare war on you if they're not already busy fighting Germany.

 

[Average Manatee]

Stop the lies and start the truths. Go on a DOW-spree rampage and Allies will declare war on you, trying to reign you in. Your neighbours will also always react to your threat level. The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

Not at all. The AI (as of the latest expansion) only reacts to threat levels of factions. Neutral nations can have hundreds of threat and never get DoWed (although if, say, Japan's threat puts the US at 0 neutrality then the US will still join the Allies and attack Germany even if Japan is neutral). It might have been different in earlier versions, I'm not exactly sure how the scripts worked back then.

It does react well to threat as long as you are in a faction though.

This is the case only during WW2 itself. Allies will declare war on you if they're not already busy fighting Germany.

Nope. I've conquered most of Europe as Poland before 1939. Germany declared war on Sept 1st 1939 (as scripted, even though it was absurdly suicidal) and the soviets declared in very early 1941 (which is also scripted I believe). England and the US sat around happily doing nothing the entire game, even though I had annexed France after couping them (drops them to 1% national unity so that you can conquer them by taking a single province, absolutely hilarious).

Though the AI might be refraining from declaring war in the early years and gauging some kind of power metric before declaring in the later years. I'm not sure.

 

[Spectacle]

The only macro-level AI problem is that if Germany goes peaceful, then there won't be WW2 in Europe, though Japan will almost always run amok in the Pacific.

Why is that a problem?

 

[GarfunkeL]

Because the game is boring as hell if you don't have a war going. It lacks all the nation-building aspects of EU and Vicky. There's really not much to do while you're at peace, except to prepare for the coming war.

darkpatriot, that is wacky. My experiences have been total opposite. I think it was in SF when I played a super-aggressive Hungary, and got Allies to DOW me once I had conquered Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria and was busy with Greece. Though the Danzig event fired a week later, so it wasn't that big of a headache. Similarly, in FTM, I played as the USSR and got Allies to DOW me when I went for Sweden and Norway after eating Finland in Winter War. Perhaps the scripts have been changed for TFH?

Still, it is a testament to the sandboxy-environment of HoI3, that Pdox was aiming for, that different players can have so varied experiences.