Now that the upcoming Graveyard of Empires DLC have rolled out the contents that Iran, Iraq, India and Afghanistan will receive, what are you thoughts on it? And with GroE releasing soon, does this mean that we will finally get/be a step closer to a full-on total rework for China and an expansion for the Pacific Front/Southeast Asia?

Old Thread: >>1927763

Damn, can't load this save no matter what. Wasn't anything too exciting, mostly wanted the new USA Oppenheimer achievement but I had a lot of fun making the USA as strong as possible. Beat Germany by March 1943, Japan February of 1944, used two nukes in WWII and was pushing Stalin back to Warsaw by 1947.

Help
How do I stop this shit? When claim strength hits 100 I lose my entire army. I keep clicking but it doesnt stop

>>1970520
>End the monarchsit question

you have to take that. You need to be ready to take that the instant Poland starts their focus that gives them decisions against you, that will stop it for good.

Be warned though, that once you've ended the monarchist question, Poland WILL get a wargoal on you.

>ruins your fun comp stomp
How do I turn this bullshit off, who the fuck invented this yellow !.

>>1971298
switch battle line setting (the double arrows) to aggressive, it usually solves this.

>>1970026 (OP)
>Southeast Asia
Probably? SEA is now the biggest source of population and resources remaining that do not have focus trees.

>>1970038
Simply rebalancing veterancy to penalties to be a complete assfuck if it's veterancy is below "trained" would already be plenty.

An internal "trained"/"regular" pool of manpower to pull replacements from would be nice, though.

>>1971391
>SEA is now the biggest source of population and resources remaining that do not have focus trees
Half of LatAm is still missing content despite Trial of Allegiance's promise that it will cover the region.

>>1971459
Country packs are just for flavour. SEA needs a mainline patch.

>>1971396
Something like this might be the best way to go about it. Not sure what else there is besides adding "pilot mana".

Am n00b. Is there a specific war score you need to make the other capitulate or is it random? Ive had russian empire's capital encircled for like 2 years now and they wont give up

>>1971636
Fixing bugs, and making carrier wings exercise with the fleet, instead of separately.
Uh, making rockets a special project and much, much cheaper.
"Converting" captured equipment to your own at much, much shitter rate (you make a thing, but without expending resources).
Maybe rebalancing Infantry equipment/artillery/etc, and all those upgrades you unlock are actually hardcoded levels of "variation", complete with extra production required and more resources needed.

>>1972134
Capturing high-key cities like Moscow/Stalingrad/Leningrad does it.

Alternatively, you could also go and do the decision in your Intel Agency where you prepare a collaborative government on them. You can stack them until you do it five times, which will reduce the War Score you need to capitulate them by 30

>>1971391
good SEA mods?

Whatever happened to the urban combat rework we were supposed to be getting alongside this dlc?

>>1972134
You can't just encircle stuff, you need to actually take it. Pretty much ever city that shows up on the map counts towards capitulation.
If you do a full collab government on Russia then all you'll need to cap them is to take Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad.

I feel like doing a Germany game where I don't instantly capitulate the UK right after France on purpose just to make the game more interesting.
No idea how I'm supposed to invade late game UK and cap them while they have a million US troops on the island and with total allied sea domination though, but it might make Barbarossa more fun since my back would be threatened.

>>1972134
Capitulation is based on control of Victory Points in their core territory. Tiles with Victory Points are marked on the map with an icon (square, pentagon etc) and labeled with a name. They are worth varying points, which you can see by mousing over them.
Typically when you control 80% of another country's total victory points, they will capitulate. This threshold becomes easier to meet if their war support is very low or if you have collaboration governments with them.

Regular un-labeled tiles are also worth a small amount of VPs (like 0.2 each) and countries that are very small or very large can sometimes have so few VP cities relative to their regular tiles that you just need to grab a bunch of random territory in addition to their big cities to capitulate them. With Russia you can cap them after taking Leningrad, Stalingrad and Moscow if you have a max collaboration with them, otherwise you'll need to expand past the Urals to capture enough VPs.

>>1973171
Also if you setup a colab government using spies it will reduce this by 30% along with a lot of other benefits. Only do it for large enemies like the soviets. (it's so OP if you manage to get soviets to 100%)

Is it possible to change the Custom Game Rules, specifically AI behaviour, and still have ironman achievements obtainable? I know you can turn historical focuses off and set most of them to historical except the one you want but this stupid fucking country won't do what I want so I want to be able to set them to go down a specific path. Haven't been able to find a mod so far that let's you change custom game rules and still get achievements.

I fundamentally don't understand how the game handles who gets what in a civil war. huge stability, main party has 85% popularity. opposition force ends up getting 9 out of my 11 regiments. Like literally what the fuck is it based on.

Trying to learn how to play Hearts of Iron 4, but the focus trees are absolutely massive i have no idea where to start. Any tips what should be my approach here?

>Mandatory Palestine now exists

what did paradox mean by this?

>historical game as US
>invading Italy in 1942 after clearing North Africa
>italy had flipped monarchist for some reason
>italian civil war happens
>now italy is fascist again???
>fascist italy joins the allies
>fascist italy calls the allies into their war against the allies
>as far as I can tell this just means that I am now at war with all of the rest of the allies while also being in the allies, but none of the other allies are at war with each other
>my troops in Italy are defacto encircled by my italian puppet, who is at war with me but also my puppet
What the fuck?

>>1973676
Maybe try learning to play as one of the many countries that doesn't have a gigantic bloated DLC focus tree?

>>1973676
Playing the USSR as your first playthrough might be a terrible decision given how it's complex in the early game due to Stalin's paranoia mechanic.
I'd suggest picking a nation with a more smaller focus like Romania or Mexico. If you really wanna get some action going from the start then pick Spain if you feel daring.

>>1973742
HOI4 fucking sucks a lot of the time.

>>1973742
play shit game, get shit on

>This game plans to unlock in approximately 8 hours
Wait, what, already?

why is it so easy to repay debts as greece? Like it just costs a couple hundred political points and suddenly all your debts are paid without any other consequences and you get rewarded with with like 20 Civ factories. Not very realistic

>>1973708
Johan hates Israel.

>new DLC
>with full updates to India, Iran, Afghanistan
>no discussion
Why so dead?

they cut so many of the actual interesting paths and those that remain are half-baked
also the achievements suck donkey balls

MODchads... why can't we stop mogging Base Game shitters and their SLOP paths

>>1974954
TNO

>>1974990
The worst, most realism, neoliberalpilled NuTNO path is LEAPS AND BOUNDS ahead than the best Vanilla Soi4 has to offer.

>>1974945
>India, Iran, Afghanistan
That's why. Who cares?

Why does HOI even exist at this point. It's very clear these fucking Swedes don't care about anything that happened after WW1, that's why they've morphed HOI4 into essentially an alt-WW1 simulator where you can somehow resurrect all the empires that just died 20 years ago and go on a world conquest, or even resurrect states that haven't existed for hundreds of years because EUfags can't help themselves.

In what fucking universe does it make sense than you can make Occitania an independent communist country, but the Soviets still never invade Poland because the game's faction/war/diplomacy system is so barebones it can't model this historical event without causing the British to declare war on Stalin?

>>1974996
Mod cope

lmao

>>1975233
>Democratic tree for Afghanistan not found
I swear you modfags are the most insufferable bunch of this community.

So are any of the DLCs worth getting?
I have the base game but the general consesus seems to be the DLCs just make the game worse?
The only one I'm really interested in would be Man The Guns because I enjoy naval warfare.

>>1975233
>gais
>GAIS
>play my mod!
>PLAY MY MOD!
No.

>>1975386
You pretty much need all of them if you want to play countries beside germany, russia or france because paradox is the greediest company in the world. There is no spanish focus tree until you get la resistance for example

>>1975527
Well that's probably okay then because Germany, Russia, America, and Enclave (Reborn. Chicago, and Raven Rock) are the only factions I care about.
I tried to play Isengard but that mod CTDs whenever you start a game.

>tried every single path already
>even the hidden gandhi one
>its all slop
>go to the dlc steam page
>already negative
wtf i cant believe the chingchongs were /ourdudes/ all along

>>1975704
What kind of degenerate reviews a DLC?

>look inside
>review bombing
>entitlement, wanting it for free

The fact that one of the best DLC's since Together For Victory is being review bombed shows you the state of the current HOI4 community. If it isn't Super Hitler crushing the Allies with prototype Death Machines, they hate it.

>>1975738
>give India a silly formable that cores Tibet
>shitters get mad
>because Paradox exposed "alt-history" for what it is - silly fun, not serious business

>That which isn't bugged breaks old shit
>That which doesn't break old shit is bugged
>That which doesn't do either of the above is some uninspired garbage focus called Summon The Superchads that gives you 2 divisions of 30 Balochistani peasants armed with sticks
>Historical broken since last DLC, not fixed, even more broken now
>DLC with as many missing icons and text as some rando's first-ever mod off the Steam workshop
Incredible that Paradox's best-selling title gets treated this way while less popular titles are given dedicated jannie squads to go around cleaning up the fallout of new patches. When the fuck will they give us a Custodian equivalent? It doesn't even need to be a big team, one(1) single dev could fix all the broken cores to begin with.
>>1975729
>>1975738
>>1975739
All of you are brown.

alt-history yeah but why is there no (or is there) a mod that improves the historical scenario, only with yer fabled 'believable worlds'
'calm before the storm' was supposed to be this years ago

>>1975809
>rt56
>blackice
>darkest hour
Now they aren't good but neither are most conversion mods

>commie studio
>all of their communist paths are suck
what does they mean by this?

>>1975845
Who are you talking about?

>>1975738
I used to draw stuff like this when I was a kid.

>>1975853
the so-called "blue-haired devs" at Paradox Interactive

>>1975729
>>1975738
>>1975739

new dlc, unmodded

>Nationalising Oil is a single focus
Really?

>>1976332
Isn't declaring a socialist republic from a nazi state in vanilla like three focuses

>>1976353
I worded it badly, I mean when Mexico nationalises the oil the USA gets an event and the option to embargo/invade, meanwhile Iran can nationalise the oil company of one of the big empires and nothing? Didn't they invade/coup Iran IRL when they tried that?

>>1976374
No I get you, I'm just joking about great vanilla focuses

>>1976380
My bad.

>>1975761
>>1975933
And you're a bunch of butthurt chinks

>>1976374
They removed the communist & fascist party popularity check on the british focus to Secure Iran, which means you'll either be invaded by the Soviets or by the British or (if the Operation Countenance event works as intended) by both at the same time.

>national spirit simply called "army"
lmfao when did it all go wrong? was NSB and BBA the turning point?
where were (you) when paradox got niggered?

>>1976568
What are you talking about?

>>1976598
Iraq has a Nat Spirit for the army that's just called "Army"

>>1976611
Probably a rush job that they forgot to fix. Not like it matters, it's just Iraqi Army, or Royal Iraqi Army, IRL

>>1976613
>Probably a rush job that they forgot to fix.
that's the entire fucking DLC lmao

So this thread is just full of /v/eddit tourists coming over to circlejerk culture war shit about how ebin the new DLC is for making chinks mad pre-release? Posters like >>1976598 clearly don't play the game

>>1976638
I just don't rush to play? Almost 1300 hours, I need to be careful with Paradox games.

>R56 is better than 15 dollar DLC
many such cases

>playing afghan
>germany sets up oil production and has ownership of it
>special decision to steal the oilfield from germany (I don't use it)
>civil war the ai briefly takes oil fields
>I win civil war
>germany doesn't own oil fields anymore (I have ownership)
>oil field product doubled for no specific reason
>option to steal oil field from germany still there.
Interesting

>>1976676
I find R56 is very good but I find their changes to research (extra research slots) means most of the time even as minor nations I have basically everything I want up to date without any trouble.

>>1976766
how many times can u restart a civil war?
if MP someone has agents that are spreading ideology can u redo this infinite times?

>>1976811
Not sure i haven't tried that yet.

>>1976568
>when did it all go wrong?
When they stopped making cool trailers like this. Every trailer afterwards was unable to capture the coolness of this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lXpmhu_9OQ

How do I go about invading the UK in January 1941? Their navy is huge and they have nearly two thousand planes flying over the island.

>>1977073
That is why you build subs and naval bombers or cas to blow and sink their navy to the bottom of the channel.

>>1977076
I've got about 75 subs set to convoy raiding, but are they really going to be effective against their main fleets?
Also working on some naval bombers.

>>1977083
Subs are incredibly effective. AI sucks at building actual cruisers and destroyers so there is nothing to counter them.

>>1977083
The long story short is that most AI countries don't start with Sonar researched and the AI takes way too long to research it and then actually put it on their designs. This means that even when a fleet looks big and scary there's a very high chance it literally cannot hurt subs with less than 20 visibility. You just put enough into sub research to get their visibility down and then set them hunting on "always engage." That way they'll never retreat, but the fleet that can't find them will also not retreat and just keep eating torpedos until they hit and kill things.

This has worked since the game was new and still works now. Paradox has never figured out how to balance subs or fix the AI's inability to respond to them.

>>1977073
>spam subs
>naval bombers
>win

>>1977083
AI is braindead when it comes to navies. It's why Japan + USA and the Pacific War need a giant rework in general to make them enjoyable rather than just a giant cake walk or slog fest.

>>1977018
Nah, losing the Sino-Jap war should result in every Samurai Lineage general committing sudoku, and a permanent, maximum tilt towards the Navy. (with Army penalties greatly reduced) And remove Duplicate Air Research for free. Now the Navy is in charge, and it can only make Special Forces battalions, with everything else, except artillery, having a -50% everything penalty.

Choosing Kodoha or Toseiha should tilt towards Army or Navy (with the other being a bit reduced), going Communist or Democratic should get rid of rivalry entirely, and having the rivalry be balanced should be the worst of the worst spirit you could have, because they're too busy squabbling who's at the top.

>>1977073
>>1977076
>>1977083
Submarines are absolutely overpowered and trivialize all aspects of naval warfare
>Ridiculously cheap, you will ALWAYS outtrade against a normal surface fleet
>HOI4 submarines are way better at upfront brawls AND escaping after being detected than their irl counterparts too
>Only way a surface fleet wins is having a billion dedicated anti-sub DD's with enough sub detection and antisub weapons to make a difference outside of merely being meatshields(which means all AI navies and 90% of player navies are disqualified) which are more expensive to build, overly-niche in what they are good against, and cost more fuel to operate
>Even with a dedicated anti-sub force, if the submarine spammer lucks out on a single engagement where the surface fleet's screens are out of position for any number of reasons(including repair bugs) the surface fleet's capital ships get obliterated by a hundred torpedoes
The only thing submarines are bad at is scoring Naval Dominance %. To "balance" submarines, the devs made it so that submarines provide basically zero naval dominance points compared to surface ships. The thing is, once you've sunk all the enemy's ships with your submarine deathball you can call up your starting navy's surface ships and have them Patrol whatever sea region you need to go through for a naval invasion.

The ONLY places in the game where most of the above doesn't apply is in Shallow Waters ocean regions... like the English Channel. Submarine spamming gets a debuff there because subs are way easier to detect, one that's just enough to allow surface fleets to merely go even with. As Germany or any European continental power just have your subs raid on either side of the English Channel while using naval bombers there instead. AFK for 9 months watching the UK blithely sail its fleet around bumping into waves of torpedoes then activate your naval invasion order and march into London.

>be me, winning war
>~1943 hits and enemy suddenly gets good, rushes me and I + germany die
Why does this happen?

>>1977099
>>1977228
>>1977312
Thanks anons, it worked like a charm.

so now the Chinese aren't the problem anymore?

>>1977312
Submarines were absolutely OP irl too, and single reason why Britain was contained to their isle and going through food shortages.
>this post was fact-checked by the Sleepy Admiral of the Wolfpacks

>>1977658
>Submarines were absolutely OP irl too
...when going up against a relatively underprepared enemy. Once the Allies figured out convoy and anti-submarine tactics and the technology for sub detection improved, trade interdiction fell apart. This doesn't happen in HOI4, anti-sub warfare never catches up to/surpasses sub warfare.

>>1977731
This. In reality subs were chased to the mid Atlantic gap by allied air power within the first year of the war, and only lasted in that gap because neither side could spare aircraft carriers to cover it until Italy was defeated. Once Italy was out of the war, Britain shifted escort carriers into the Atlantic and Germany called off the U-boat campaign because their losses were too high relative to the tonnage they were sinking.

The problem in-game is that carrier air wings provide no spotting against subs, and that subs can remain submerged in battle indefinitely, which is to say they accidentally abstracted out the subs main weakness and are surprised subs are OP

>>1977604
They never were. All the warning signs of GoE being dogshit were visible before release. B team that made ToA in charge, and retard formables front and center in marketing. All the focus about chinkmanii seethe was a convenient way for people to shout down doubters
>"Hey this looks like it's gonna suck ass, is anyone else worrie-"
>"LOL CHANG IS MAD CHANG IS SAD"
Then GoE came out and everyone circlejerking for 2 weeks over how Paradox should let pajeetbharat core all of china epic style realized it really is shit

>>1977827
my favorite part of the retarded redditor chinkseethe was them going
>"Heh, Paradox should give content to Taiwan to unify China to spite them Chinese heh west taiwan lol"
They are so historically illiterate they missed that the modern Taiwan aka the Republic of China is already in the fucking game with (garbage) content! Those morons all want to be hardcore taiwanese ultra-nats to stick it to the Pooh but they take is the exact opposite position taiwan ultranats (such as the KMT right) take, many of whom deny "taiwan" even exists (and that its *just* the republic of china).

I wish they would focus more of stuff that was mana bar related (focus trees)

>>1977827
>how Paradox should let pajeetbharat core all of china
Why think so small?

>>1977658
>sank less percentage of tonnage than in WWI
>hard countered by the convoy system, let alone seaplanes or patrols
Submarines are OP, but only if your opponent is retarded. Just look at what happened to Japan

>>1977604
>>1977827
dude elephants lmao!!

>>1977604
CCP and India have been fighting a border war for literal years and then a vidya company allows one side to core the other. Not talking about the Tibet shit but coring all the way to Shanghai.

I wish my country had people with enough patriotic consciousness to review bomb a game if it tried to clown on us like that. Sadly most Canadians are the type to go "it's just a game broooo :)) what are you, some kind of CHUD?" if someone left a negative review for letting China/India core uswhich our government is allowing them to do irl already

>>1977731
It's because the game doesn't simulate sub combat properly. Submarines have to stay on the surface to charge their batteries. They are primarily surface ships. Their dive capacity is temporary. That's why they got fucked up.

BUT the technology potential was there, because Type XXI submarine could stay primarily under water.

Have you thanked Lily today for all xer hard work on hoi4s latest dlcs?

>>1978210
First pacifica, now another one?

>>1978257
>People seethe at Pacifica, calls for the end "dem troonz ruining tno" and Pacifica goes away
>The replacement leads are two white males who sterilize the mod with realism and drive everything to the ground
It's called Cosmic Punishment.

>>1978294
still better than the old TNO

>>1978295
I bet you never read a single plan of the NuTNO devs

>>1978294
>t. Pacifica
Who cares about some dogshit mod?

>>1977018
>i wish we get an EIC-like gimmick for Japan along with it, where Zaibatsu puppet the government if they lose the sino-jap war enough

Manchukuo sorta fulfills that role if you go Communist since the Samurai Lineage generals fuck off to there as well as half of the Imperial Navy if you win the Japanese Civil War. Honestly, I'm more surprised with the fact that Manchukuo hasn't received a touchup around the concept of it being ruled by Zaibatsu cliques.

>Want to start new playthrough
>But devs said they'll be releasing a hotfix patch in a week
>So I don't want to start a playthrough with all the bullshit fuckery in the game rn
>"So I'll just play an old nation again!"
>Select any of my usual favorites
>Zero motivation to play, over familiar, boring
>Want to play new countries
>Repeat cycle
Why is my brain a nigger

>>1978411
Because you're a content-starved Paradox addict.

same, tee bee eytch

>>1977076
>>1977312
Is this true if I don't have Man The Guns?
Also: Should I get Man The Guns?

how do i fix robotic divisions costing manpower in OWB?

>>1970026 (OP)
>be me
>after a game full of cheats and tutorials, decide to play clean
>choose brazil
>empire of brazil, took Urugay and Bolivia too fast and too easy with default division
>watching some design tutorials
>"lmao, just add support, check the org, keep the width low for infantry and a tank for the armor and easy peasy"
>design space marine and improve the other divions with better equipment
>war agaisnt Chile
>ONE fucking division of 5 outdated infantry battalions is stopping my stack of 4 armored infantry
>for fist time, check the green bubble
>terrain+general shit+attacker nonsense+EXTRA WIDTH+TRENCH = some stupid sudacas with weapons from WWI can get a whopping 330 soft attack and shame a modern division with tank of only 90
>start micro but its too slow
>it eventually workss but... lmao Chile joins the allies
what im doing wrong?

>>1970026 (OP)
Every DLC ruins the game

>>1979148
Your division width should divide cleanly into the width of the terrain types you'll be fighting on. Generally infantry are minmaxed to fight in forests because they get shat on by tanks in fields. Bigger width is better for attacking because attacking divisions need to stack lots of breakthrough or else they just get fucked. Infantry has low breakthrough and is bad at attacking. Tanks and mechanized have lots of breakthrough and are good at attacking, but suffer extreme terrain penalties so they are limited to plains and hills until you get a lot of positive terrain modifiers from tech.

>make "space marines" divisions in 1939
>they die instantly
you lied to me

>>1973742
By Blood Alone absolutely destroyed Italy and made it unplayable because the Regno Del Sud mechanic is bugged beyond belief and retarded.
Thank you Paradox very cool

>>1976353
Bad example, you have to fight two civil wars for that lol

>>1979148
you need to focus a lot more on special forces infantry in South America, make a fuckton of mountaineers or marines for the jungle depending where you are fighting

>>1979198
>not investing in Special Forces Support Companies ( broken )
>not creating templates that mixes Infamtry and Line Arty + Light Tank for that hardness, all while balancing org rates
>not investing in Grand Battleplan Doctrine until you reach Night Assault

Worked for me.

>Not content with review bombing, the Chinese users reportedly used "The Chaos of the Taotie's Essence" curse to meddle with Paradox staff's Chi in order to make the DLC horrid and buggy.

>>1979676
i know this is a shitpost but ive unironically seen the excuse that the chink reviewbomb and death threats scared+stressed the devs so the dlc is incomplete

>>1970026 (OP)
>new DLC
>It's all about WHO GIVES A FUCK counties

>>1979676
Paradox has truly been courting death, I see...

I forget. How do you want to set up garrisons.
1 unit division or max unit division?

Im not familiar with Paradox and how long they support a game

But how many years does HoI4 have left?

Vicy 2 to 3 was about 12 years and next year is Hoi 4s 10th ani so would it be safe to say there's 2 more years and HoI 5 is already in the works?

>>1979198
How much defense does your tank have?

>>1977073
You're supposed to mass produce fighters to have air superiority, air drop all your airborne divisions, take a port as fast as possible, sacrifice your entire navy to protect convoys and rush VPs as fast as possible. You can do this in 1939 right after France dies. Do a collab government or two on the UK to get them to cap faster.
That's how I do it anyway, I don't know how naval shit works in this game and I don't really care to find out.

>>1981425
I think it was like 40ish armor and the whole division had 20 armor. I tried it as another country and it worked, I think it was just because I fought against Germany as Austria and they had AT or something

Ohnonono graveyard of empires sisters...

>Greetings all,

>At the risk of stating the obvious, the release of Graveyard of Empires has not gone the way we wanted. Today, I want to post a mini-retrospective that explains some of what happened leading up to the release, and how we plan on acting on the results of that and on subsequent feedback and reception moving forwards.

>One of the most important parts of the pre-release process we perform in Studio Gold is the Go/No-Go meeting. This is where each discipline; QA, Tech, Design, Marketing, Business et al, present their perspective on the state of the game and expectations on the likely reception thereof. We do this so we’re all on the same page, and so we can jointly arrive at a consensus on whether to launch or not. In GoE’s case, while we identified some areas of uncertainty mostly relating to dev diary feedback, we agreed that there was nothing out of the ordinary here, and that a release at this stage was acceptable. I don’t want to diminish my role here or throw anyone under the bus: as Game Director I can overrule in either direction, and I did not - I did not see what I should have seen.

>Collectively, and personally, we were quite clearly wrong. As an organization we were unaware of the issues present in this release, and this represents a serious need for some inward thinking on how we arrived at this decision, and how we reorganize ourselves to prevent it occurring again. I have few answers for you right now as we’re focusing on the short-term goals for putting Graveyard of Empires right, but we have no intention of sweeping this under the rug.

>From a long term perspective, this is now the second release of a Country pack which has performed worse than expected. Review score is actually a surprisingly difficult metric to evaluate. It is better to think of it as a snapshot that, on balance, gives us an idea of how much of the community considers everything surrounding a release to be a net positive or negative. This can include price, quality, scope, overall opinion of a company, and many other things. What we tend to do is aggregate the key sentiments of negative and positive reviews and work out, on balance, where the main points for and against are. The two main negatives on Trial of Allegiance were, in first place the regional price adjustments in two specific markets, followed by scope. It’s a bit early to say for Graveyard of Empires, but first impressions are content direction & quality (as we’ve acknowledged), followed by scope.

>Both regional pricing and content quality are things that I would hope are relevant only to the individual releases here. They’re localized. Scope, on the other hand, represents a clearer area where we need to offer more on a fundamental level. Scope in this context, is the nature of what we’re offering: focus trees, mechanics, 3d models; the whole package. Content-only releases are popular with some HoI fans, but on balance are not enough to resonate with the majority of the community. Once again, I don’t have an answer yet here, but we’re aware of it, and will be evaluating how to make these releases more exciting to more people.

>And finally, in the short term, I want to address our plans for Graveyard of Empires. Beginning this week, we have a series of patches and updates planned for GoE as well as for the base game in order to both fix and improve content that you found lacking. I sincerely appreciate all those who have reached out with constructive suggestions. We have all hands on this endeavour right now.

>/Arheo

>Timeline:
>12th March - Patch (Operation HEAD)
>20th March - Patch (Operation KNEE)
>Late March - War Effort (Operation SHOULDER)
>April - Updates & Changes to GoE content

2 more weeks until vanilla is "fixed"

Any tips for setting up a non-historical game so one side doesn’t get completely steamrolled?

>Burma gets some flavour
Surprised how Ne Win is in charge of Communist Burma despite the fact that the BSPP wouldn't be created until 1962. But I suppose there must be a stand-in for the communist faction. It's just as weird as Suharto being the "fascist guy" for Indonesia as well with a party that wouldn't be made until the 70s.

It's bizzare that Thailand's capital in-game is a Metropolis as well. But I'm guessing all this is in preparation for a SEA-Pacific DLC I guess.

>>1983905
History doesn't begin when a political party is formed, and Ne Win had history during the period already.

Suharto, on the other hand, was 15 in 1936.

>>1983916
Maybe, but the party he was a member of is considered democratic in the game, despite it being communist historically.

On a side note, I do like how they added the Imamate of Oman in the game and it being a non-cored state that you have pacify to core it. It's a shame that it didn't receive anything beyond it.

>>1983939
Trial of Allegiance also added flavour to countries without a Focus Tree. Was neat.

But with all the whining about non-mainline DLCs being... non-mainline, and the abysmal reviews of DLCs, while main game is 91% Positive, I am yet to be convinced the players aren't mostly fucktards. It's actually the biggest reason I avoid posting on the forums - the posters are fuckwits, and I don't want to talk to them.

So an I just spam fighters?
As long as I control the skies, their CAS and bombers are useless, right?

>>1983905
Huh, I didn't know Burma had more unique leaders for the other ideologies. Not bad.
Does the Middle Eastern puppets of France nad the UK got some too?

>>1984021
>Does the Middle Eastern puppets of France nad the UK got some too
Lebanon and Syria gets a unique portrait for their democratic/neutral guys. I believe Palestine got a unique neutral guy too.

>>1983949
To this day I'm still wondering why they stopped short of giving Bolivia the same treatment as Paraguay/Uruguay in ToA. You'd think that giving their factions unique portraits + ideas would mean they'd get it.

>>1984036
Neat

Im actually pretty excited for the Prototype Vehicles DLC. I hope they include lots of the weird armored car designs

>>1984787
Currently the ground category for special research is kind of bare so we're sorely needing more silly experimental shit to fit in there. Kind of silly that the air tab goes all the way to supersonic jets and nuclear ICBMs and the naval tab goes all the way to nuclear-powered supercarriers and ballistic missile submarines but the land tab just has like 6 techs, three of which are actually just WW1 artillery tech and two of which are just basic doctrinal support tanks. At the very least they should've made Modern tanks a special project the way they did for modern airframes.

>>1984020
Basically yes.
As long as you have air superiority, your fighters will intercept and disrupt enemy ground attack planes, causing them to cancel their strikes or just shooting them down. You also get huge stat bonuses for having air superiority and your opponent gets a bunch of penalties. Once the enemy air force is basically defeated you can start switching over to CAS production and just win through air power. Shit infantry with CAS will beat the best divisions in the game.

As a rule of thumb if you want to fight the air war your limiting factor is rubber, so you should basically strive to have enough factories on air that you exhaust most or all of the rubber available to you.

>>1984814
Just put rocket tech in there, and make the related vehicles obscenely cheap.

>>1984821
Are bombers even worth it?
Seems like I could just have Fighters, then some CAS and Naval Bombers for supporting surface battles.

>>1984821
Aluminum is a bigger bottleneck for plane production.

>>1984857
Strategic Bombers are worthless. The game has hidden backstops that basically make it impossible for strategic bombing to deal meaningful damage to industry.

Tactical Bombers can be a consideration. The ability to bomb out forts is mandatory for multiplayer but since the sp AI doesn't build forts that only matters in the few areas of the map that get a bunch of fort levels from focuses.

CAS is the only ground attack platform that matters. However, the best CAS platform varies based on a country's MIOs. Usually Light Airframe CAS is better, but if a country lacks a CAS MIO and has a tactical bomber MIO, then medium airframe CAS will be better.
>>1984853
That would be a good idea, except they already put rocketry in the aeronautics tree (which makes sense) so splitting it between the two trees wouldn't make much sense.

>>1985006
I don't have the DLC that lets you edit planes so none of that stuff really matters.

>>1985006
It's only aesthetic, and you need to just scroll over to read the tool tip on what tech you're missing. MOD tech trees already have it. It's only mildly confusing.

what is the best country if you are going in basically blind and trying to figure out how to play as you go? Im not averse to reading and will check the wiki as need but it would help if concepts are drip fed in a country to handles one problem at a time

I asked in the KR thread but I'll ask here as well -- I'm going to be playing in a multiplayer game with some friends. Four of them will be on a big faction (Russia and some allies) and I'll be playing Poland (which is a part of Germany's faction). I'd like to put up a good fight but I haven't played the game in over four years.

How do I go about this? What's the best way to make a bigger country's life difficult as a tiny country?


>>1985237
My first game I played Hungary, but any smaller country that supports some bigger faction will do - you get to try shit out without having to worry about a massive frontline.

>>1985237
most would say italy. You have a tiny easy war against ethopia in the beginning, and then you just worry about getting troops on your border with france, which is very small. Later on you send troops to the eastern front to help germany against the soviets

>>1985237
Unironically the US
>no direct threats
>very long and forgiving buildup time
>huge industry so you can afford to try more things and mistakes are more forgiving
Most nations are pretty easy to play once you know what you're doing, but can be painful if you don't know what you're doing since you're on a pretty strict time limit before you either have to invade a world power or be invaded by one.

I'd argue France is also a good pick because they're the only major with a mechanic explicitly set up to allow them to lose a war, get conquered and yet continue playing.

>>1985534
I think one of the issues of the US is you're pretty much responsible for D-Day and naval is a huge pain in the ass to work out as a noob
I had my friend play Canada when he was new. Very simple focus tree that's just a bunch of national spirit buffs and shit(no new mechanics like balance of power, provincial decisions, etc). Decent-enough manpower and industry to fuck around with land divisions. And like the US, there's zero risk of invasion.

>>1975386
If you enjoy naval warfare then HOI4 is not the game for you

>>1975761
Forgot
>New update adds 60 new country tags
>None of them have content or even portraits, many have uninspired flags
HARD MODE
>New content releases a number of these tags via the focus tree to do absolutely nothing all game but create border gore and lag

>>1975809
Darkest hour was my favourite years ago but they stopped updating it around the time of BftB and now historical gameplay is just hell and turning off historical focuses is worse. Nothing is playable aside from being a major with player led peace deals installed.

>>1975933
Is the appoint pro soviet government focus ripped straight from Romania's tree?

>>1976613
$25 + tip + no refunds for DLC content cheers playa

>>1976811
You can't boost ideology in your own country. As for other countries, you can do it via spies but iirc it takes a full year for the operation to kick off and there's no guarantee of success. Some countries can't be coup'd (or at least the option just doesnt appear in the spies UI) and most majors have a spirit specifically to deter changes to their ideology (ideology drift defense)

>>1978382
I'm pretty sure absolutely nothing in Japan/China has been touched since MtG. Romania has recieved 3 mini updates in the last couple of years. The first was to add a mechanic to switch sides, then they added Codreanu back, then they added a random side-fascist tree to get the national christian party (no meaningful change from historical)

>>1982261
The first patch was really disappointing. Barely fixed anything and I doubt there's going to be any major changes at all.

>>1983949
>Neat

>>1986175
Speaking of WtT, they removed one of the KMT-Generals and replaced him as a spirit in their Army Command/High Command. Other than that, I genuinely hope that they make new random portraits for the Nationalist/Warlords,Communist and Manchukuo factions in the rework that reflect their uniforms historically.

If they can give the Japanese random portraits with uniforms used by the IJA ( and Finland getting theirs for some reason ), I don't see why they can't extend it.

>>1986180
Yeah, the thing with Venezuela and the scripted Peru-Ecuador war was neat. Not exactly tingling my loins, but not too bad, either.

>>1986164
And the Axis one

>>1986190
I'm calling you a shill

>>1987575
You will call anyone and everyone who actually enjoys any game a shill. Because you think shitting on games constitutes a personality.

In fact, the usage of Inglorious Bastards is completely unwarranted. You did not find an impostor. I am not here pretending to be "one of you". I do not want to be "one of you". I do not want to be seen as "one of you". I'm better than you. If I had your troglodyte approval, I would think I was doing something wrong.

>>1975386
>I enjoy naval warfare
play Rule the waves 3 instead

Please give advice on hoi4 MP, it is brutal despite me following "pro" advice to an exact degree

First, pros always claim rushing gun 2 is better and that 7/2 are worse yet almost every game I have played has the succesful human players do 7/2s and they push and cause losses on the defender (be it me or another player) like crazy, I am talking players who still have fuckign gun 1 (1936) in their 7/2s vs my infantry with gun 2 (1939). It is insane, even mass assault infantry spamming guerilla warfare can't defend against 7/2 and arty despite pros claiming those divisions are trash.(Maybe that's why dankus and other pro hoi4 youtubers lose in youtuber tournaments to the "noob" singleplayer youtubers).

Second, air, more specifically CAS, is useless. I have played games where, since I rushed gun 2 I also invest and get TOTAL AIR DOMINANCE, I am playing against people with not a single factory on planes. Yet when war comes the enemy with just anti air shoots down hundreds of CAS (No CAS stat helps against division aa, just paradox things), not only that, the damage CAS does is like 20-40 org and 3-10 strength, it is worthless against enemies who per tile have a minimum of 200 org or more. Next, even when attacking, CAS can't break a tile, I have used very chunky divisions, so much HP and staying power and even spamming force attack (pros claimed doing that is OP and broken) so CAS can have literal months of bombing and yet they never break a fucking tile. So... CAS is trash?

Third, tanks are great, yeah, but too expensive.

Fourth, infantry and tanks lose to infantry and artillery because the 7/2 army can push everywhere.

I MUST MENTION all MP games I have played are free for all. That's why I thought rushing gun 2 and doing airforce was, like pros said, the best.

Please, give advice, I beg you. Beating the AI is easy, in singleplayer CAS gets hundreds upon hundreds of damage against max boosted ai, so I thought they would be useful in MP but holy shit they aren't.

>>1985237
>>1985534
>>1986146
>>1985279
>>1985532
Nah the UK is best. Gives you access to 5 puppets to help fight ground wars and you can get some experience helping france before fucking off and when japan attacks the USA joins to take care of naval invasions for mainland europe and deals with the pacific theater and you start as an Island with the biggest navy so you can afford to make mistakes when learning naval and germany literally can't touch you outside of aircraft

>>1988068
UK is too air- and navy-dependent, both of which are much more abstract and less intuitively understandable to a noob compared to land battle. Before the USA joins the war you're the only naval power for the Allies and if you don't organize for anti-sub and convoy protection you'll get strangled to death.

>>1988070
Its AI it aint touching you at all. You can lose 3 battleships as the UK and Germany can still not naval invade you and resources aren't too much of a problem because your massive fucking starting fleet is enough to keep control of the waters while you learn what depth charges are and build your aircraft to learn how air superiority works,

And yeah thats the point no matter how much you fuck up eventually the USA will come along and take control of the saddle.

>>1988081
You're talking past my post, not replying to it.

>>1988093
Because your post is retarded. learning navy and air is important to playing the game and UK lets you do it safely but still able to take part in the game and pick battles without needing to be the one to fight japan and the USA being a get out of jail free card. Resource shortages just mean you can't produce things and you can't lose until your core territory is taken.

So worst case scenario you sit on your island until the USA bails you out

>>1988081
By default the UK can operate their navy for about 2 weeks before they empty their fuel. In game they're more starved for fuel than Germany and don't really have any alternate sources they can easily access, and limited space in their core territory to build refineries. On top of navy and air being unintuitive sideshows that distract you from actually learning transferrable skills, the UK is incredibly crunched by tight fuel management and it's very punishing to misuse your bloated navy and end up without any fuel for your planes fighting over the english channel or be forced to trade away like 30 civs and stall all your construction just to keep your ships functioning until it can finish a convoy battle.

>>1988107
>"what is the best country if you are going in basically blind"
You're right, a complete new player should start off focusing on learning naval gameplay. The premier Allied naval power that spends almost 3 years pretty much alone against the Axis and has to defend the entire globe at once is definitely the choice to go with here. A total noob losing all resource access and industrial output because his convoys got obliterated isn't an issue because he can just go AFK and play something else until Pearl Harbor happens.

>>1988123
He will not be alone because of his puppets

>>1988122
>>1988123
It's kinda crazy man its almost like the UK has 5 puppets to help defend its reach and only has to bother with Germany because by the time Japan enters the war the USA enters and can mop them up.

Hoi4 is not a hard game to learn if you can read especially when fighting the AI and the only hard part is Naval hence you should play as the UK who fights germany a non existant naval power and only really has to deal with Africa because all the logistics of dealing with the pacific theather and D-day is done by the USA.

>>1988134
Unlike real WW2, Canada won't save you in HOI4.

>>1988139
I mean if you would rather a new player play italy or germany and get raped by the UK, Soviets and USA instead of doing the raping then yeah tell people that shit advice.

Also UK was never at risk of losing they crippled the german airforce during the blitz and later their surface fleet

>>1988124
>>1988134
>AI raids trade convoys
>Commonwealth puppets have no real navies to defend trade convoys
>UK played by a complete new player will not be able to defend trade convoys
>A newfag UK will lose all his convoys and spend the rest of the playthrough a cripple
>Therefore UK is a bad idea for a complete newfag to use as their starter "learn the game" country
Idk how this is difficult to understand unless you are genuinely autistic and can't comprehend things

>>1988142
Because they'll look at the naval option that says protect convoys? Unless you assume everyone who plays this game is retarded and won't see the giant naval order icon with a shield that says protect convoys and just dump all their fleets around england. The UK also has enough resources to make a small industry its not a complete wasteland. Thats what I did my first playthrough.

2nd Point what difference does it make when playing as germany or italy? Once the axis attack poland britain can just start naval invading you and if you don't know how to plan properly you might legit lose to poland or some other minor power. So whats the difference between getting fucked by convoy raiding then learning how to protect convoys then getting the rest of the game down compared to getting fucked by the UK as germany or italy and learning to counter tha?

>>1988141
>>1988145
you can have the new friend not play a major desu mexico canada even fascist yugo is ok for learning

>>1988147
If you play a minor though you kind of sit on the sidelines and don't really get to do much either.

>>1988147
Canada is awful to play as if you're new because you're both weak and slow but also extremely far from the war and low impact. Your focus tree is specialized for meta multiplayer tank rushes but in SP you need to be the air spammer because AI UK doesn't know how to put its planes up and you can't fight over red air.

Once you know what you're doing and you can minmax your build they're fine but as a new player there are so many missteps you can make that just turn the game into a drag to 1950 where you don't feel like you get to do anything. I started with Canada and it was absolutely a mistake.
>>1988068
Here's how every player playing the UK for the first time will do things.
They will form an expeditionary force and station an unoptimized infantry army in France because that's what the UK did historically.
They will be surprised when Germany walks through the maginot because France's AI just walks away from it.
France will suddenly capitulate with like 95% of its territory unoccupied
The new player's entire ground army will now be encircled and unsupplied in france with no possible escape and die.
The new player will say "wow that was bullshit!" and stop playing.

If I want to strengthen a nation, but it isn't enough, is there some cheat I can use to help them out?
Like, is there ANYTHING I can do to make Japan not a joke?

>>1988191
You can do anything with console. Give equipment, pp, factories, etc.

>>1988194
If I TAG into JPN, cheat them a bunch of stuff, then TAG out, will it mess up my game?
I've never actually used the TAG command before.

>>1988197
No, it won't. Don't recommend unpausing, though. Or AI will take over your original.

Also, I guess Japan never takes Navy Dominant spirit. Despite the fact that Dockyard Output+ spirits are worth their weight in gold to naval nations. Army penalties aren't even that bad.

>>1988155
That will happen literally anytime a player messes up something like attacking france through the alps or invading poland or soviets as germany and gets fucked because of it. Its a bad argument that anyone can make because its a hypothetical scenario you just flat out invented.

>>1988197
Just don't unpause because it only takes 1 tick for the AI in control of your original country to redesign all your templates and change all your production lines.
Also bear in mind that while you can give a country equipment and design things for them and set up production lines and stuff, they will immediately change everything back to their predetermined templates the instant you unpause. Equipment in their stockpile doesn't matter when their division templates are nonsense.

There's no helping Japan, though. Their position is too complex for the AI to be able to handle well. Without handicaps they'll literally lose the china war because they just have too much split between little pacific islands and can't prioritize.

>>1987589
You literally talk like someone being paid to play down the game's faults and gaslight new players into thinking people with complaints are parrots. You laughably use the example of Paraslop including a scripted peace deal to a conflict with no gameplay bearing whatsoever as indicative of Paraslop putting effort into the game.

>But with all the whining about non-mainline DLCs being... non-mainline, and the abysmal reviews of DLCs, while main game is 91% Positive
This, alongside your use of the word 'neat' is peak reddit fag. I'm actually wondering if you samefagged.
>On a side note, I do like how they added the Imamate of Oman in the game and it being a non-cored state that you have pacify to core it. It's a shame that it didn't receive anything beyond it.
What actual player says this? Who the fuck cares about Oman.

>>1988199
>>1988245
that is why you always disable the AI too when tagging over

So what are these buttons? They're new since the last time I played.

>>1989327
It's a mechanic that allows you to bomb secret facilities in the map.

>>1989335
>secret facilities
What are those?

>>1989339
Secret Facilities were a new addition to Gotterdammerung where building them would allow you to research Land/Air/Naval/Nuclear "Wonderweapons" or prototype Technology like Radar.

Bombing your enemy's Secret Facilities should slow down their progress into their Secret Facility research. And depending on how prepared you are, you can basically throw a wrench at their efforts heavily.

>>1989343
So since I don't have that DLC, then it probably does nothing?

>>1989344
Probably.

>>1988790
Just pause the game, twat

>>1988735
You never talked to an actual shill, imbecile.

>What actual player says this? Who the fuck cares about Oman.
Actual Paradox completionists that remember HoI3, niggerfaggot.

Nice to know you're one of those metafuckwits that tunnel vision on an issue "relevant to gameplay" and keep seething at Paradox, if they do literally anything other than what you think they ought to be doing.

>>1988735
>he thinks that HOI4 should be a super ebin serious game that can't have retarded/schizo tier alt-hist faggotry.

You're talking about a game where the US can magically turn into the CSA by virtue of being a fascist state with a meme leader path that was ripped off of kaiserreich nearly a decade ago. Oman having a silly focus tree is not one of the worst crimes the game is guilty of.

>>1989494
You have angered the horde. A flood of Respectfully Disagree will soon adorn your posts.

>>1989494
Want a really dumb focus tree?
Byzantium
It literally makes no sense for greeks or turks to even want to revive eastern rome, yet it's there because Byzantium is a fan favorite / most played tag in all pdx games.
pdx clearly does not give a single shit about realism and that's a good thing.

>>1990111
Fascists did want to revive Byzantines, but PDX portraits it in the most dumb way possible and they portray the historical Megali idea that was widely more popular as a shittier option.

>>1990118
I personally always go for the Megali Idea as Greece just because I think it looks prettier and was more reasonable at the time.

>>1990125
megali makes sense because the turks ousted greeks not even 20 years before and slaughtered them relentlessly.
byzantium is ahistorical though. it's something that exists purely for the fun factor.

>even dommygay hates it
oh non o no pdx sisters

>>1990111
Any more stupider than Manchukuo ( and by extension, Puyi ), growing a massive pair and fighting a war against Japan before restoring China?

>>1990215
This is the faggot that put it in the heads of his NPC viewers that HoI4 combat out to be in Vicky 3, btw. And we all had to read that dumb shit here.

>>1990527
lmao i dont even watch the annoying german faggot but he's right if he pisses (you) off.

civil wars make no fucking sense in HOI4 and the strategies to deal with them are just the most fucking gamey retardation.

>>1990215
Tommy has fallen off hard. He's genuinely really bad at the game and flips flops between
>Okay chat, whats the meta here?
>AHh fuck the meta! I'm going to play my way!
>Damn, this game only panders to meta play that's so disappointing. Whats the meta chat?
He constantly complains about supply and you never see him do anything about it but quit the run. He loves to snake units then rages when they get encircled. He battleplans into mountains and claims that he could have pushed easily in xyz patch from years ago. In the roleplay games he claim he is being ganged up on. If you watch his stream (which I do not, however I watched about 10 mins of a live on youtube once) he is very abusive to his viewers. Something that started off as a joke
>Subscribe to stop being a loser and get a gf!!!
to now
>Shut the fuck up don't ask me to show templates...mods ban this fucker
Dankus is a far better watch now, and its really sad how much Tommy goes on about 'creating' Dankus. Dankus is his own man, and a good player who's playstyle has always run counter to Tommy's.

>>1990700
Because the only historical civil war is the spanish one, which is heavily scripted specifically to cull gamey cheese. All the other civil wars are just a gamey pretense to turn Germany communist and don't serve any real purpose except to make some ahistorical trees objectively weaker than others.

>>1990833
Cont.
I used to really enjoy Tommy's old campaigns where he'd put a lot of effort into editing so that a campaign feels like an actual saga. I think he lost Markoni as an editor because the production quality has really gone downhill and his videos are now just 'okay guys, heres me fail to play Iraq' Picrel is peak Tommykay content and its 5 years old now

I really hope HOI5 moves away from the decision tree structure as the core gameplay mechanic.

Need some advice.
I have a campaign I was really enjoying. I went Democratic Germany in a game with historical focuses disabled and focused on rushing experimental tech. Ended up in an alliance with monarchist Poland and Fascist Britain against Monarchist Russia and their ally, Democratic Japan.

But then Monarchist Italy declares war on one of my balkan puppets and drags me into a war with them. The war goes fine until I trigger the civil war, at which point the game bugs out. The instant the civil war triggers, UK and Poland are at war with me. There's no declaration of war or invitation from anyone. Some script somewhere fires and we're just instantly at war with each other.

I could win that war, but if I wanted to be at war with the whole world and win with brute force I would just play historical germany. I spent most of this campaign cultivating and building up an alliance only for some swedish troon's bad scripting to bug out and torpedo it.

Since historical focuses are disabled, I also have ironman mode off and full access to the console, and a save file loaded right before Italy splits into civil war. Is there any way for me to prevent that script from firing and preserve my alliance or should I just abandon the campaign?

>>1990852
Abandon the campaign. Historical off is basically unplayable with vanilla. At the very least put on player led peace conferences and the toolpack mod so you can manually map paint and fix shit like you described.
It's really stupid that a game that encourages players to explore alt-history with every new patch makes alt history so rage inducing. It's no wonder that 0% of players have any of the new achievements, let alone the fact ironman creates an autosave every in game week

>>1990833
>>1990840
>Tommy bad Dankus good
I don't even like Tommy, never have never will, but Dankus is a fucking snake sellout who attacks people like Spudgun for not worshipping paradox.
I mainly don't like Tommy because his editing sucks. He plays map games and doesn't show the map, he only ever shows his face and the events he's reading. I mean, it's just so boring.
Dankus is bad because he is a two faced faggot who is edgy and racist in private but goes after people in content creation for being edgy and racist. He tried to cancel Spudgun for (not really edgy) shit he said in private chats despite Spud making better content than him. pic rel.
Dankus sicks his reddit army on anyone who has less than a favorable opinion of him.
Keep in mind, Dankus has never played a single game with Spud so he had no reason to come after him and he still did.
Apparently they "made up" and are on good terms now. But it was all Dankus's fault for instigating drama where there was none pretty much.
Dankus wants a monopoly on PDX game content. He wants to be the face of every PDX game he plays. He constantly sucks up to PDX for sponsorships and never says one wrong thing about them. He's exactly like One Proud Bavarian who is another turbo Victoria 3 shill. Once you see this ego about him you will never want to watch him again.

>Who is spudgun and why am I mentioning him in the same vein as TommyKay
Markoni used to be heavily involved in the same Vic 2 mp games as Spud.
He moved on to bigger and better things obviously but that was the place he was at for a while until he became Tommy's editor.

>>1991304
>>1991310
Sorry I forgot who dankus was because all these retards blend together.
Replace "Dankus" with "bokoen"
Dankus WAS just a player in Bokoen lobbies.
Anyhow, the story goes Dankus was too meta of a player for Bokoen lobbies which goes to show you how fucking terrible the content creator side of hoi4 is.
Dankus and Grisha are the best players of the game and they're both basically outcast from the "biggest" content creator lobbies.
HOI4 is not a content creator game unless you are iSorrow. He's the only guy who can pull hundreds of thousands of views on a HOI video in one day now.

I'm a noob. What's a good medium tank template?

>>1991454
go high on armor but keep it below 20-25ish production cost. speed really doesn't matter much
for the actual unit itself try to have 8 width or more be mediums early on. you can put cavalry or motorized alongside that. Probably you want 18-20 width total for early divisions and later 25-30 width, most of it being motorized for defense numbers.

>>1991334
Grisha is an annoying Russian who cant shut up and talks zigger propaganda all the time, people hate him and its causes conflicts also could get you banned on twitch, i rarely watch hoi4 but whenever bokoen plays big mp games Dankus is in them too so idk why would you say hes banned.

>>1991469
well not "banned" per se but this pretty much summarizes it.
dankus was just being unjustly gimped for the enjoyment of bokoen's shitter crew.

>>1991469
also look past your opinion, grisha is actually good at the game too no matter how annoying he is and how little he actually makes content.
yes, i know he's a propagandist. that's secondary to the point.
if you play good in or around hoi mp games you get punished for it, doubly so when it's a tuber/twitch faggot game.

>>1991478
Its simple, a lot of people hate him so much they refuse to play with him, Pretty sure Bokoen doesnt want him in his games so hes banned from those matches.

>>1991463
Also what's the difference between motorized and mechanized?

>>1991567
Mech is just better. All of its stats are better except speed, but it's speed is closer to the speed of tanks so it's better for that anyways.

>>1991567
Mech has crazy high breakthrough and defense and you can customize mech to be even stronger than it is by default.

>>1991334
Dankus and Bokoen are the only bareable content creators. People hate Dankus for taking the game too seriously, and can you fault him? Those games can take 3 hours just sitting in the lobby and then another 5 to get to ww2. What's wrong with playing well aside from it not giving Bokoen enough footage?
Bokoen's short form videos are good and he has decent enough jokes to keep it entertaining.

The absolute bargain bin of hoi4 content creators is isorrow, feedbackgaming and alextherambler
isorrow
>Claims to quit hoi4 and pursue other content
>Starts up some other new hoi4 series like a-z in order to keep pushing out pure slop
>Reddit humor
feedback
>Used to be fun to see exploits
>Sucks paradox cock hardcore now
>Now makes 50 minute long videos giving click-by-click advice on every mechanic ever
>Not funny at all. Offensively british. Probably really annoying irl
alextherambler
>Also claims to be quitting hoi4 constantly but due to faggoty mental health issues from not making enough money playing hoi4
>Dated an ugly chink for a while.
>Genuinely awful at the game
>Also sucks paradox cock but doesn't even get sponsored anymore just does it for free
>Joined Yogscast to scrape money off other creators so he wouldn't kill himself or something
>Gets less views than channels with 1/10th his sub count

>>1991469
>>1991475
>>1991478
>>1991488
Grisha literally joined wagner group and is probably dead in a muddy hole right now

>>1991760
Feedback is a beautiful warning to everybody there why you don't make YouTube your whole career. Absolute husk, the life has been sucked out of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0N6ih8JCxg

>>1991761
the funny thing is they didnt want him and told to stream hoi4 from their office for propaganda

How do I get supply in Russia?

>>1991922
Still can't believe this actually happened. Judging from this screenshot he plays like shit too.

>>1991760
Seventh opium war...

Germany is about to kick things off with Poland. What should be my plan as Italy?

>>1991997
If you're playing as Germany and moving in, you'll have to build supply hubs and railways. Infrastructure will help, too. You'll probably be fine on trains but make sure to check.
If that's going to take too long for you, then see if you have any transport planes in stock. You can give them a mission to airdrop supplies to a region.

>>1992047
I'm playing as Hungary in the axis. How do railways and supply hubs interact?

>>1992060
When you need supplies to be delivered to troops on the front lines, it gets sent from supply hubs and travels on the railways. One endpoint of the railway needs to be attached to the supply hub, the other end should go close to your troops.
You may think this means that supplies will simply be delivered without problems, but keep in mind that supply hubs have a certain range. This can be changed by looking at supply map mode (F5 on your keyboard) and clicking one a supply hub. You would click the horse icon and change the motorization level to extend the range at the cost of trucks. If the distance is still too far, then you'll need to build more supply hubs close to your troops.
If you have a lot of troops on the front line, then you may need to upgrade your railways to get everything to them.

I really hate how little infrastructure helps and how fucking long supply hubs take to build.

>>1992123
That's done on purpose. The AI is retarded, which means in practice Operation Barbarossa only takes a few months to take all the major cities and capitulate the soviets, which in turn means there's too little time for the allies to narrow their global fronts and concentrate forces for Italy or D-Day while there's still an eastern front. Pdx's solution is to just turn much of russia into supply desert where you're forced to spend half a year building hubs to keep moving.

It has the added benefit of narrowing some of the usable terrain elsewhere in the world--where terrain really should be impassable anyways. Like it's not worth building supply hubs in Burma to push into Thailand or japanese-held Indochina, so battle concentrates around the existing supply areas based on where historically the battle for Burma actually played out. But it's a gamey and stupid gameplay contrivance. I really don't understand why historically impassable jungle and mountains are terrain the AI will send 50 divisions walking through with no supply and constant attrition and yet the salt flats south of El Alamein are impassable.

>>1991903
Xi... I kneel...

>>1991997
Go to the supply map mode and push toward supply hubs and along railways.
>>1992047
Don't listen to this guy. There is no reason at all to bother building supply hubs as you go. If you have a good army you should be able to non stop push Russia until you reach the urals at which point it might be necessary to upgrade some railways but thats it.
Supply hubs have a base construction time of 300 days. Taking down the soviet union should take around 300 days anyway

>>1993025
You genuinely do hit supply deserts in Russia. They exist. They were put there on purpose.
If you can battleplan through them to the next hub with no supply because the AI is genuinely that shit, good on you, but building the hubs is standard in multiplayer because fighting in a supply desert is suicide against someone actually fighting back.

Man, Super heavy artillery is amazing.

I put self propelled SHA with tanks and infantry and other tank divisions just melt in mp

>>1990845
I really hope HoI5 doesn't happen, and you shut the fuck up.

>>1991304
Shut the fuck up, Spudgun.

It sucks that for all the new goal icons they made, they barely used them. That and the fact that there's no Indosphere/Greater India path that actually goes into Southeast Asia sucks as well.

Also
>Re-Codify the Dhimmi implies that the Dhimmi system would be massively overhauled to show how the new Mughal Empire won't be as taxing towards their Non-Muslim Subjects
>Mandatory Jizyah that somehow increases your weekly stability originally instead of being a major headache in the long run.

>>1994756
How many new icons did GoE added anyway?

>>1994765
Iraq got 42
Persia got 113
Afghanistan got 50
India got 77

>>1988150
Playing a minor lets you focus on one specific thing to learn it because you can't do anything else.

>>1993087
The original poster didn't ask about multiplayer, but nice try to deflect. In any case, my point stands. If you build supply hubs attacking the Soviets in multiplayer I am sure you'd be laughed at. Where did you hear this?

By the time you reach the supposed 'supply deserts' the Soviets are around 80% toward capitulation and you can easily follow railways to major victory points near/past the Urals. The 'supply deserts' have no worthwhile victory points. You probably get really upset when bashing into Kazakhstan when you should be pushing for Kazan but we were all noobs once.
As for the area south of Arkangelisk, it was once a notoriously difficult area to push, but in a recent patch they have added a railway connection there so it is much easier. In any case, this area is pointless anyway. There are no relevant victory points to grab.
Look at picrel. You can clearly see that the area with major Soviet victory points has an abundance of supply hubs. This is based on the 1936 start, neglecting that the Soviets also gain more hubs in the Baltics and that Poland builds additional hubs as part of their focus tree. Most of these hubs can support around 2.6 supply, which is equal to 4 infantry divisions per tile. Motorizing the supply just about doubles this and if you spend a meager amount of IC upgrading the railways or adding logistics companies to high-supply units like tanks you can turn the Russia campaign into France 1940. This is also not taking into consideration the buffs gained from generals/marshals, and the hand holding provided by Germany's supply buffs in the last DLC.

Even if you push well past Moscow, the major victory points that remain are located in areas that can support around 2-3 infantry divisions per tile. This should be more than enough to beat a Russia that has awful supply from wherever their new capital has moved to.

>>1994818
Super heavy artillery divisions

>>1988150
A minor is, indeed, made out of minor.

>>1994813
Damn , what a waste.

>>1994845
It's not really that bad for each individual states. I just hoped they would've added more generic icons.

>>1995293
>i just hoped they would've added more generic icons

>>1995358
You laugh but it's basically a lifesaver for newbie modders who don't want to splurge on paying off artists to do their own little icons related to the country they're modding.

My other gripes regarding the icons would be that they didn't go hard on giving each dlc nations their own icons for their historical/alt branches.

If you play an axis minor you just babysit Italy from all the naval invasions they ignore after Russia capitulates.

>playing Austria
>Switzerland declared war on me
What the fuck

>>1996181
You should diplo-pressure Switzerland to give you the option to Non-Aggression Pact with them

Never naval invaded UK before, how the fuck do I do it? It still says I have 0% naval supremacy no matter what. Is there some kind of trick to it?

>>1997487
>he's trying to naval invade using subs
>not just any subs but 4 entire subs and that's it
holy fuck you're braindead.
what, you spend like 100 hours memorizing the nato symbols but you can't figure out how naval supremacy works? get good jesus christ.

>>1997493
it says it will take until 1959 to build one heavy ship, Im not doing that

>>1997487
>Is there some kind of trick to it?
Building more ships ( DDs/CLs and the occasional Heavy Cruiser/BB and Carriers ) + naval bomber spam to chip away at the Home Fleet in Ports and in the surrounding Seas.

Bonus points if you also invested in Strategic Bombers to stall the UK's Military Factories/Dockyards and Air Bases while having Heavy Fighters to escort them.

>>1997516
What, did you already lose everything? Better get air supremacy and air drop and air resupply, then, gay boy.

>>1997516
Year?
Dockyard count?
Industry?

>>1997519
Additionally, you should invest in minelaying technology + Air Minelaying if you're really aiming to slow down and decimate the Home Fleet since they heavily slow down any opposing fleet, making it easier for your fleet to spot them.

>Operation SHOULDER patch drops
>This happens
I don't feel so good...

>>1997487
My strategy involves building lots of subs, setting them to no retreat, and slowly grinding down their navy until naval invasion is possible. Midget subs can be pretty good due to tier cheapness to build and low visibility, and you can build a lot of them fast, just keep them out of the English channel. Most ships have a hard time detecting subs, meanwhile they just get hit with torpedoes. That may change with >>1998419 but I've not tested it. In any case, if a torpedo hits but doesn't make a killing blow on a large ship, it should still cause that whole fleet to return to port for repairs, leaving the water open for naval invasion if you get all their fleets.
If you have the industry for it, get 1940 subs with better engines and torpedo tubes, and whatever else reduces sub visibility. Even if you decide to stick with midget subs, you can still put the new stuff on them.

spot-on

>>1998455
The fact that you don't get Ma Zhanshan as a General if you go down the Assertive path is weird because you get the ability to recruit Manchurian bandits. That and I guess not having Park-Chung Hee as a Kwantung General as well makes it weird.

>that Korean Revolt where Kimmy gets all of the limelight
Fuck that as well. If they were to give Korea a semi-decent focus tree with a Communist branch, have it historically reflect how there were many factions of Korean Communist that were aligned with the CCP/Soviets and their local brand with Kim Il-Sung representing the Soviet collaborationist branch.

>>1998455
Shikai restoration and Xueliang would be fun to have in vanilla. But it is pretty spot on, for once an intelligent thought comes from a redditor. Konoe becoming Emperor would absolutelly be weird considering how staunchly he was on the side of Hirohito. If Korea ever gets the focus tree it would be fun to have the OG Jucheists under Sin Chaeho.

>>1990833
>He battleplans into mountains and claims that he could have pushed easily in xyz patch from years ago.
This works really well if you take GBP and have mountaineers. Probably the best way to clear mountains.

>>1991760
>feedback
I got banned from his discord for criticizing vic 3. He's such a paracuck it's unreal.

>>1999216
Depending on the region it's usually just best to bypass mountains entirely. Most places you can circumvent them with paradrops/naval invasions or just push better terrain with tanks and eventually render the mountain region irrelevant. Actually clearing mountains is only necessary to capitulate some shithole balkan microstate with no coast

>>1999216
That's another thing too. He refuses to use the right tools for the job. He never uses special forces except to try and make space marines that are masters of nothing. So many of his recent campaigns would be made better by simply making a few good mountaineers

I have not played vanilla in months and now I'm looking for non-overhaul mods to run for a historical game.
Aside from the obvious player-led peace deals, toolpack and occasional graphic mods, does anyone have suggestions?

>>1999236
>Depending on the region it's usually just best to bypass mountains entirely.
If your playing Japan or Italy you're gonna have to fight in the mountains regardless. Balkans, China, and Ethiopia are full of mountains.

fuck the devs, why did u nerf tanks
and also why the fuck did u not 1+ to suppression for armored cars.
or buff its recon support capabilities

>>1976286
>iraq
>led by an arab
what's the issue here?

>>2000260
They don't know what the fuck they're doing

>>2000260
bigger question why are armored cars even in the game? they are almost the most worthless land unit even worse than early motorized, so why do they exist? Noob trap?

>>2000599
They exist to be a noob trap, yes. They were one of those worthless things added in some dlc to pad content without a clear gameplay design plan for them. That's why they never bothered to add a designer for them. You can just make wheeled light tanks instead.

>>2000634
La resistance was a horrible DLC but I get an itching feeling that espionage missions were supposed to one day include armored cars somehow.
Anyways the NSB tank designer pretty much invalidated any use they had left like you said.

>>2000642
They could probably just roll it into a role you select for the tank designer. Make it require wheels or something idk

>>2000599
they look cool rolling on the map, sometimes I make one when Im winning

What has the bigger effect, factory output or production efficiency cap?

>>2000784
Cap doesn't matter until you hit the cap. Output matters instantly. Otherwise they both have the same effect. If your cap is 10% you're producing things 10% faster. If your output is +10%, you're producing things 10% faster.

>>2000671
They could but didn't. The problem is that Paradox has teams constantly rotating in and out for dlc work and stewardship of these long-running games and they're just not checking each other's homework. There's this weird unwillingness to iterate on things from previous DLCs, which is why new equipment added in DLC X doesn't get new content when all the base game equipment gets new content in DLC Y.

It all just amounts to poor project management on pdx's end but at this point the old code is probably such a mess that going back and messing with stuff more than a year old is probably not worth the effort.

>>2000820
yeah I really think this is what is bloating HOI4 lately. Way too much modularity for the sake of it.

>>2000803
It's multiplicative, btw.

>>2000784
it will probably take 2 years to hit cap.
retention, output, base matters far more imo.

>>1997487
>use naval bombers to grind down the british fleet
>use navy only for the invasion
>invade on the right side of the island
>maybe use paratroopers to take the other harbors
the amount of resistance can change game to game but as long as you micro manage and use armor you'll be good

>>2001341
>and use armor you'll be good
Did anyone notice how effective it is to add the Christie Suspension on armored units? I remember easily overruning enemies with units that I have attached it to.

Also, I'll just add on to the naval bombers advice by saying that investing in naval minelaying is an absolute must because you can start devoting Shipyards towards Naval Units that are focused on fighting than making light minelayers.

>>2002243
Is pretty great for overruning and encircling units.

>>2001341
>>1997530
ok, today I started up the game again and I took UK. Weirdly, I put all my submarines OFF "naval invasion support" and put them ON Convoy raiding", and for some reason this let me invade them. Apparently, Naval invasion support is useless

>>2004282
subs don't do shit for naval invasion support

Trying to explain everything the navy noob is doing wrong would take way too much fucking time.

irl why didn't papa stalin just ram 450 infantry divisions behind the dnieper river backed by as many AA guns and artillery pieces his godless commie nation could shit out and laugh as the so-called unstoppable wehrmacht killed itself?

>>2004371
they used the war to cull the prisons and drunkard population by sending them out without guns to the front line.
then the war ended and they killed the injured veterans and sent them to gulags.
but today all you hear is "slava ger[g]oyim who bravely defeated the nazi menace (TM)" as if they actually respect the sacrifices their brothers made and it isn't just hollow words.

>>1989344
The raid button is how you drop nuclear bombs now.

>build 2 super heavy BBs for Sealion because I've never tried them before and the AI is allegedly slightly more competent now
>throw in a carrier too since I got lucky and stole the tech from the Americans
>the Royal Navy just sits in port for the entirety of Sealion
Dammit, I wanted an epic naval battle over the channel. I didn't even have that much CAS/NAVs.

>>2004371
Without lendlease they couldn't actually field that many divisions and the purges left them with a shortage of low level officers to train new recruits.

But the Soviets already outnumbered the Germans during Barbarossa and it didn't matter. Their tactics weren't effective against German tank doctrine and they didn't have enough AT guns to go around, so their defending divisions were just cut to pieces repeatedly in breakthrough and encirclement maneuvers. The Soviets had something like 300 divisions at the start of the invasion and lost nearly half of them in the first few months, with over 2 million men captured via encirclement along with 20,000 destroyed tanks.

>>2004371
He thought hitler wouldn't attack

>>2004546
biggest problem is usa is underpowered and gimped.
there should be ai to lobby to get lend lease from usa.
soviet, uk, china should be flooded with guns.

>>2004282
For the most part naval supremacy is based on the hull. Any mission that allows a fleet to engage in combat will project supremacy. Subs provide negligible supremacy because they're subs. You mostly need capital ships to project supremacy in contested sea zones. The Naval Invasion Support Mission tells the fleet to rebase to the nearest port within its mission area that's set as the launching point for a naval invasion battle plan. Once that naval invasion launches, the fleet will follow the transports (thus protecting them from being attacked by an opposing fleet) and provide shore bombardment once they attempt their landing.

There's no reason to put ships on Naval Invasion Support unless they can provide escort efficiency to protect the transports (ie Destroyers, Light Cruisers), and/or provide shore bombardment for the landing battle (Battlecruisers or Battleships).

The amount of shore bombardment a fleet provides is based on its total Heavy Attack and maxes out at a 25% stat penalty to the opposing side's stats.

>>2004546
the soviets built something like 86000 tanks on the eve of ww2
imagine if papa stalin spent all that steel arming 450 infantry divisions to the teeth with guns, AT/AA/Arty
that is what, 9 million men rammed behind the dniper with another 15 or so mil in the population bank ready to replace losses
germany can't break that
no one can

>>2004839
25000* i made a mistake an confused post ww2 and pre ww2 numbers my bad

>>2004371
What do you mean he didnt? That is exactly what he did. The Soviet army did retreat beyond the river once it became apparent they couldnt hold the initial onslaught, and they did use the AA because they couldnt match the Luftwaffe initially, and they did ram human wave of prisoners and conscripts into the german line to hold them back whenever they could.

>>2005677
Lmao. Based.

>Open Beta live now.
>Added stuff for Iran like new generals, advisors, resources plus changing 24 from 70 days to 35 days.
We are so back Persian bros.

>decide to play a game as US
>historical focuses on, everything default
>Germany is late on Anschluss
>France denies Czehcoslovakia, triggering a war in '38
>and then abruptly joins the Comintern instead of the Allies and drags the USSR into the war
>Britain also flips communist for some reason
>now there's no major faction that I can join
>Britain decolonizes, turning 2/3 of the map into communist microstates that all immediately join the comintern
>Spain joins the axis and just dies to france
>it's now 1940 and communist superfrance hides behind the unbreakable maginot because Germany's focus AI broke and won't do the benelux focuses, Barbarossa has advanced beyond Moscow but still can't capitulate the soviets and the entire german army is months away from being encircled as twin naval invasions from the black sea and baltics are only a few tiles from meeting in Poland.
>and Japan is trapped in the Xibei San Ma loop and unlikely to ever do its war focuses
I wish they'd take a break from making stupid little DLCs for irrelevant minors and just focus on fixing their game.

>>1994756
It's odd because in Turkey's focus tree, the focus that brings back the Jizya tax absolutely rapes your stability in exchange for a bit of reduced consumer goods.

>>2017759
Historical Germany has been fucked ever since Gotterdammerung and never fixed.
>Often doesn't take the Invade Nordics focus, takes the Infiltrate Nordics focus that boosts fascist popularity instead
>Often doesn't take the Invade Benelux focus, takes the Infiltrate Benelux focus
>The focuses are both bugged and say "causes a civil war in NOR/SWE/BEL/HOL if fascism support goes above 40%" but seemingly triggers civil wars at random. I've seen Belgium go into civil war at 29% fascism party popularity
>Also not invading Benelux means the Germans ram themselves into the Maginot for 6 months and lose 1/4th of their manpower and equipment
>AI Germany is bad at managing MEFO, which wouldn't be that horrible except sometimes the AI "forgets" economic focuses completely. I've had runs where it's 1944 and Germany still hadn't taken anything from the initial pick-one-of-two eco focuses
>AI Germany often also "forgets" the focus that lets it establish reichskommissariats. No idea why. WW2 can end without AI Germany taking that focus even though it's available earlier than Anschluss. Because MEFO bills/Economy of Conquest consumer goods buildup ramps up faster the more non-core territory Germany occupies, not being able to make RKs rapes the German economy even harder
>Guarantees Finland too early, goes to war with the USSR during the FIRST invasion while France and Poland are still alive

The list goes on. I've tested all this shit without mods, without player intervention(spectating the world in historical mode as Bhutan with fog of war turned off etc).

>>2017783
The basic issue is that if a country can't complete the next historical focus in queue when historical focuses are enabled, it abandons its historical AI. It's set up this way so that, for example, Spain doesn't get stuck trying to do ineligible fascist focuses if the socialist side wins the civil war due to volunteer intervention.

The problem is that Germany's historical AI wasn't adapted to the new Anschluss conditions. Missing Anschluss causes Germany to abandon its historical focuses, but because of the way Germany's focus tree is designed it can't flip governments that late in the tree so it just follows some hobbled variation of the historical fascist path where it randomly skips important focuses.

Missing Anschluss tension-cucks all of the democracies, which causes them to miss their next tension-gated focus and veer off into lala land. This usually means flipping communist because, with some exception, communist and democratic branches are on the same side of a mutually exclusive tree, opposite fascist/monarchist. This is also why the USSR is never affected, since it doesn't have any world tension gating its focus path doesn't change regardless of what Germany does.

>>2017775
I feel that both branches should have taken something from EU4's Mughal Path but with an added twist. Where, if you go down the Secular Mughal Path, you could go on and "liberate" Southeast Asia/Tibet into your own sphere of influence while taking on the Subcontinent's Dharmic Heritage to tie SEA to you a la the Indosphere.And if you take on the Recodify Path, you should get some wargoals to move towards Persia/Afghanistan before conquering the Arabian Peninsula and proclaiming yourself as the Caliph.

At the same time, I feel that they should have made it so that you can only go down one path where you can either reform the Timurid Empire or reform the Mughal Empire. It's really stupid that they combined both paths together just because.

>>1973676
Play as America. The focus tree is big but not complicated, you have plenty of time to get things set up, and you have more industry than God so it's easy to win. You just rush the new deal focuses that fix the Depression as soon as you can, and then try to get to The Giant Wakes.

>>1970520
Gotta be one of the most retarded mechanics in the game.

Do I need to own the DLC for the new Iran cheevos?

I've never played the game, I just remember vaguely playing HoI2 back in the days but I never was much into it. This year I randomly checked HoI4 and it seems interesting to me. I've been reading the dev diaries since the development of the game until Man the Guns. I also started watching a gamethrough on youtube by some guy in 2021, a Germany game. So far so good, game seems good and I'm very tempted of buying it and just subscribing for a month to play. What is the state of the game today thou? Would it be worth? Is the game fun? I don't care too much about historical accuracy as alreyd know they went kinda lol lmao and went hard in the fantasy realm.

>>2017783
>>2017759
I don't know what the fuck your problem is, the script is followed to the letter on my machine every time.

Did you buy the game and all DLC legit? That's the only difference I can think of.

>>2018116
Yeah it's pretty fun
t. spent over 800 hours playing it over 4-ish months last summer (roughly converts to 8 hours a day)

>>2018086
Nope. DLC is not tied to achievements. Usually. Sometimes the check is to complete a focus, and I don't know if they're in the base game.

>>2018127
Yeah I was wondering about it since not even 0.1% of players have the new Persia cheevos.
They seem to be not that hard from what I can see, especially on non-historic.

>>2018116
It's a lot of fun. Obviously there are similarities to other Paradox titles, yet in this game military customization and strategy works best.
You really feel like you are building your very own army from the ground up with all the customization options.
Wars can also be affected a lot more by your own skill and micro management once they kick off. Preparation is still important but a weaker military can absolutely win if properly used.

>Managed to organize and actually play out a 9-person multiplayer match with the boys
>Rules are basically "no super sweaty bullshit" with no specifics because it's all friends and we trust each other not to do some gay faggot spehssmareen division strats
>If anyone gets killed they can pick another country and take over from the AI and keep playing
>Historical AI is on but you can do whatever althist path you want
>Also when it's justifiable with in-universe lore we can pause and have the host(my friend David who lives closest to the middle of all of us geographically) use console commands to adjust borders and stuff
Genuinely the most fun I've had playing this game in multiplayer EVER. I think the MP scene would benefit from everyone getting mindwiped. HOI4 MP is only enjoyable when everyone in the lobby is at roughly the same skill level but when that skill level is high it sucks all the fun out. When everyone is a retard it wraps back around to kino. Sino-Manchu-Third Rome-American Hyperwar With Ottoman Characteristics. I know inb4 >having friends but you guys really should try playing a pre-agreed shitshow lobby. My mechanized neo-sipahis are the terror of Asia.

Recommend me space muhrine divisions.

>>2018315
just add high armor mediums to your divisions with optional dozer blade it's not that hard.

>>2017817
The worst part about playing as US is that "Drafting a New Bill" isn't a national spirit so there's no good way to keep track of the time until you can do another New Deal focus.

>>2018315
>>2018317
dont forgetten dein flammenwerfertanken fur das softattackbonusezeitstungbiet

>>1970026 (OP)
Is filling up 5/5 support company slots viable if you have the industry? Or is the organization penalty too big?

>>2018315
6 Infantry ( you can add more to increase organization ) + Two Artilleries and a decent light tank with good defences and speed. And your light tanks should have dozer blades as well.

Support-wise, I'd recommend adding Support Medicals + Combat Eng + Mountaineer Recon + Support Flamethrower Tanks

Army Doctrine-wise, you'd be better off going down the Grand Battleplan Doctrine because for the planning bonuses before going down the path for night fighting because the bonuses you get from it is crazy.

>>2018315
The basic "I just want to shit on the AI" starter kit is to design an interwar heavy tank with nothing but the basic AA gun and a few ticks of armour. Set it as a Self-Propelled AA gun.
It will provide enough armour for infantry divs to avoid getting pierced earlygame and allows you to skip AA support companies so it ends up being fairly IC efficient. You can upgrade it with a better AA gun when it's available (it doesn't really matter) and steadily stack on more armour as the game progresses to stay ahead of the piercing AI divs have. I think now they'll eventually put AT guns in their divisions and end up with like 90 piercing lategame, so the space marine will eventually fall off but by that point the game should be in your pocket anyways. The division can be whatever works for you but typically it's just going to be something like 9 inf + 1 tank or 8 inf + 1 tank + arty

Another trick is that you can design a very, very expensive light tank where you just stack as much breakthrough as possible. You can pack like 100 breakthrough onto a design and then use it as a Light Tank Recon support company. It will give you the full value of its stats, basically giving a straight +100 breakthrough to the division without increasing the combat width. Since it only takes 15 tanks for the support company you can pretty much ignore reliability, and you can make them individually pretty expensive without actually raising the cost of the division by much,. Give it Small Cannon or basic High Velocity Cannon and it doubles as the division's AT gun. You can do the same thing with Flamethrower tanks (and even stack the companies together) but it's not as strong because the flamethrower tank designation halves the breakthrough. But hey, breakthrough is breakthrough. This has the added benefit of not penalizing your terrain stats the way that adding a tank battalion directly to the template would.

Just be mindful that this makes your infantry cost fuel

Left or right path for Grand Battleplan?

>>2019207
Left is more powerful but you have to use battleplans and planning bonus to get the most out of it. Right is all round good with the -supply consumption and the land night attack bonuses standing out.
So depends on your playstyle.

How's the beta looking out?

>>2019207
Right is for all-in infantry specialized countries. Left is for hybrid inf and tanks but really the use case where you're running enough tanks to make left worthwhile but not enough to make Mobile Warfare better is pretty narrow.

Generally MW, GBP right and Mass Mob right are the meta doctrines.

Any mod that rework Japan in a fun way? I don't mind a bit of powercreep, especially considering how buffed other majors have gotten.

Production costs aside, is there any reason not to use heavy fighters over normal fighters? Like an agility gate that gives massive debuffs to stats on account of your shitbricks having no realistic chance of hitting anything aware of their existence.
>>2002243
I don't get how they came up with so thoroughly retarded suspension stats.
>>2004546
Germans more or less matched Soviet numbers of men actually deployed until around Stalingrad IIRC.

Did they change the autosave frequency?
The game autosaves every week and I get a minilag during it. Actually unplayable.
I did change the setting but I think ironman overrides it anyway.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/patch-notes-developer-diary-1-16-5-operation-ear.1737976/
>Raj - Loyalty Branch
>We also added a loyalist branch for India where you remain a dominion of the UK. The tree is divided into two industrial branches. One is where you continue to extract as much wealth from India as possible, helping to fuel the UK and the dominions industries

>>2020333
>Germans more or less matched Soviet numbers of men actually deployed until around Stalingrad IIRC.
The Germans had roughly 60% of their deployed manpower on the Eastern front, with the rest standing by in France and the Balkans to address an expected allied invasion. There was a lot of drama over Hitler's unwillingness to release these assets to the Eastern front once things started to go poorly, because he believed the east could trade ground for time and that Germany's path to victory relied on defeating an allied bridgehead while it was vulnerable and then compelling them to a separate peace, so it could then focus everything on a single front war.

The Soviets had almost 100 more divisions in their TOE at the time of Barbarossa, though like the Germans some portion of that was fielded in other regions. The actual numbers on the ground on paper at least were in the Soviets favour until they lost several million to the opening moves of Barbarossa, and swung back in their favour after mobilizing through the following winter.

I'm surprised there's no Disco Elysium mod for this yet.

ENTER
They're just skins, no actual techs or soecial projects. But I guess the forumdrones are too illiterate to know that.

>>2023216
so you're telling me the grasshopper can't fly over rivers?

>>2023697
Not with that attitude. But yes it can fly when moving.

>>1970026 (OP)
haven't touched HoI IV in like 2 years
I heard they "fixed" the AI and saw some videos on the land AI

but does the AI now also use planes?
like before all you had to do was send a couple fighers up and they would stop boming you

>>2023216
holy reddit
I hope the continue milking sois for at least another 10 years with bs like this

>>2023841
>Milking sois
Judging by the reaction in the forum almost no one liked that and they kept throwing shit at them for not fully fixing Graveyard of Empires.

>>2023860
> and they kept throwing shit at them
who cares
MTG sits at 52% positive
La Resistance at 44% positive
BBA at only 35%

and yet here we are - more than 100k people bought Graveyard of Empires

>>2023876
> more than 100k people bought Graveyard of Empires
come to think of it I just now realize how utterly insane this is

based on the # of reviews (which usually is reliable) it seems to be one of the best selling DLCs in a long time
like who spends 15 dollars on a flavour DLC for Iran and India?

>>2022256
>The actual numbers on the ground on paper at least were in the Soviets favour
Even paper numbers favored the Germans, they had an advantage in total numbers present at the start of the operation and could match the Soviet in men deployed in key battles until the counteroffensives of 43 started.

>>2023879
Indians probably, I recall in the announcement trailer seeing lots of iranians and a bunch of iraquis too. I'd bet some got it by buying the pass with Götterdammerung.

>>2023901
Russian education really is something else

the prototype tanks are all bloat, u know not a single one will be viable or good its all just meme slop.
i had hoped we could get cold war era tank parts or modernizing 45-55 stuff
they could have atleast given us a infantry designer or expand to 10 support companies with more niche things like tankette officers, (which poland and italy used) mortar teams, suicide dogs, dog MP, russian sniper heroes,

>>2024146
>state something that makes glorious poccia look incompetent
>v-vatnik!!!
My bad for expecting anything else from this schizo shithole.

>>2024265
> > uhm actually what I stated makes russia look incompetent
does it?

also you claim is false
Soviets gained the numerical advantage over the axis in December '41 and kept it until the end (directly after Stalingrad it was about 2:1, before it was about 1.6:1)

>>2024246
> the prototype tanks are all bloat
> they could have atleast given us a infantry designer
> mortar teams, suicide dogs, dog MP, russian sniper heroes,
so how do I break this to you ...

>>2024274
>does it?
I'd say the Soviets being unable to utilize their superior manpower pool and - due to other reasons as well - their entire front folding as it did isn't exactly flattering, yeah.
>Soviets gained the numerical advantage over the axis in December '41
You're right. My brain must've tied the numerical disadvantage to the organizational issues that persisted through '42.

> AI (allegedly) got updated
so does the AI now finally use naval and air? Land AI seems to have improved

>>2024246
I wanted more spanish civil war stuff, but Im still gonna buy it probably

>>2023879
Man, trying to be apolitical and not judgemental on WW2 has really shit up the community, because a neutral view on fascism is the best portrayal they can get. So now it's full of fascists and miscellaneous nationalist scum, with constant seething, but never leaving.

funland has restored the old borders of the russian empire (mostly), i should go after europe next.

I made a meme! xDDD

>>2023216
The rage is from the fact its bullshit when they could have spent that time updating all the vanilla models and skins instead which are beyond shit and generic.
Also many of the designs are from the 1950's and real prototype vehicles were ignored.

>>2024767
That's cool. I like how their front profile looks like a Capirote mask or one of the Italian variant masks worn by the flagellants during their mortification of flesh procession.

Is that intentional due to their Catholic background, or is it coincidence?

>>2025232
>updating all the vanilla models and skins
>GIBS ME DAT FOR FREEEEE!

>>1988068
>Gives you access to 5 puppets
There is nothing newfag friendly about managing puppets.

>>1978210
Absolutely pathetic and transparent attempt to do a quirky reddit chungus TF2 spaghetti code moment

>>1985237
Haven't played since Stalin's schizo episodes became the Soviet gimmick mechanic, but they have
>a good starting industry
>rich in all resources except rubber
>directly neighbors or relatively close to a lot of theatres
>tons of strategic reserves in case you fuck up
>some minor wars early on, way before every single nation is in faction with the UK
>should teach you to keep supply in mind
>pretty much only vulnerable from Europe since Siberia is almost as much of a mountainous supply desert shithole as western China and nothing east of the Urals is worth any victory points besides Vladivostok
Only major thing they're missing is a navy, but that's the most counter-intuitive branch and I'm pretty sure you can just paradrop into Japan and take theirs anyway

>>2026577

>>2017797
France in particular since their historical tree is actually halfway down the communist tree. If they're still alive in 1941 chances are they'll hit the required communist support to change ideology

>>2026577
>>2026732
Not sure if upset that Lily is a tranny or glad that he's not an Indian

>everyone says GBP is good because of the planning bonus
What am I missing here?
It "only" gives at most a +30% on top of the base 30% everyone else gets, and the side that makes godforsaken supply hells less unbearable is only a +10%

>>2027707
30% planning is 30% soft attack, hard attack and breakthrough.
No other doctrine give comparable stats.
Generally the wisdom is:

Mobile Warfare for tank-focused builds, because the extra speed is a big advantage and the extra org makes more optimal division designs practical, which means more stats per tank div.

GBP right for infantry specialist builds because it discounts special forces templates, gives infantry the most stats and plays the best into the strengths of infantry.

GBP left for a generalist build that needs some of everything, this is because planning is better than the stats you get from other doctrines

And if course mass mob right is broken on the defensive or for all-in air builds where you just drown the enemy in shit infantry and use CAS for literally all your damage

>>2027979
What about Superior Firepower

alright, it's time to grow up and go back to hoi3

>>2028498
Stay there, alone.

>>2028492
There's no meta where it's optimal because in practice it's just GBP but worse. There's like hypothetical sp memebuilds where you stack soft attack on glass cannon divs and just delete Germany's population via strength damage but in terms of optimization SF is just a slightly less optimal GBP so you'd usually just pick GBP. If you need the freedom to maneuver without relying on planning, you're maneuverable enough to pick MW instead. A big problem with SF is that it gives very little hard attack, so it's worse against tanks on both attack and defense. In multiplayer that's damning because mp ground warfare is tank centric. In singleplayer there's no reason to not take full advantage of planning and just blast through the AI with like 2k soft attack so SF just really never has a context where it's "best" even though it's not necessarily bad.

Armor piercing bombs:
>can fit more than one into a small airframe
>1 IC per slot vs naval torpedoes' 4 IC
>compatible with dive brakes for extra targeting, unlike torpedoes
>if there's nothing else to do, can still do regular CAS, albeit poorly

Am I missing something or is there no reason to use naval bombers over CAS with AP bombs?

>guided bombs don't give more targeting than torp 3s
What the fuck why
>>2027979
>GBP right for infantry specialist builds because it discounts special forces templates
It's by fare the weakest design cost spirit, the real bonus is the increased unit cap
>this is because planning is better than the stats you get from other doctrines
Not necessarily, MW can also get stupid amounts of both attacks and breakthrough by stacking tanks
Raw soft attack from SF also applies on the defense while the huge planning bonus from GPB doesn't
The hard attack buff from planning doesn't really matter anyway because the AI doesn't use good tanks unless you switch tags and design it for them and players can actually use the tools that counter planning
What I'm saying is GBP isn't the best solely because of big planning numbers, it's great because it's really versatile and the planning bonus is just a part of that
>>2029334
Your plane will be classified as CAS and lose naval bomber bonuses lol, lmao
You can get away with weaker engines/more extras with torps
Torp 3s will be more IC efficient due to weighting less and not needing the extra slot for dive brakes

Have paradogs learned to block cream? I can't get it working no matter what settings I try in ini

>>2028797
Guess I'll stick with right GBP. But now I wonder what about right MA?

>>2029679
>Raw soft attack from SF also applies on the defense while the huge planning bonus from GPB doesn't
GBP gets a huge amount of entrenchment right at the start of the tree. It will always have more soft attack on defense than SF.

>>2029799
Right MA is the cheapest doctrine and gives you 5% more recruitable population for manpower and guerrilla tactics, which is a brokem defensibe tactic that deletes everyone's stats and narrows combat width.
In most cases it gives you functionally infinite manpower and let's shit infantry with cheap equipment stall forever, which maximizes the time that your CAS can be dealing damage.

On top of that, it also gives you crazy high recovery speed, so your divs reorg super fast in addition to stalling forever and you can just cycle into battles to never lose the tile.

They work best with cheap divisions that stack up and org but nothing else. You just want to minimize the IC cost in losses you're taking while guerrilla tactics provide all your durability and air power does all your damage. When you feel like you've reached the tipping point you can just battle plan with 800 shit divisions and watch the AI crumble to CAS.

Playing this way is total cancer btw. I wouldn't recommend it outside of multiplayer.

>>2029840
It gives the most out of all doctrines, which is still "just" +10, and unlike max planning you also can get entrenchment from other sources

>>2029852
Noted, thanks for the info. I always wondered why everyone said right MA was so broken, now I know.

>>2029702
Try harder, it still works for me.

>>2030025
What did you put in your ini

>>2027979
>GBP right for infantry specialist builds because it discounts special forces templates, gives infantry the most stats and plays the best into the strengths of infantry.
GBP right doesn't give you the Breakthrough tactic, while GBP left does. Breakthrough is the strongest offensive tactic by far in the game, providing not only a massive 25% attack bonus but 50% movement speed increase. It can only be countered by Backhand Blow, which is only unlocked in 2 branches the AI usually never takes (i.e. Modern Blitzkrieg for MW and Deep Battle for MA.)

And Breakthrough isn't even just for tank divisions. It's possible so long as your commander has a 1+ level advantage over the enemy general, which is pretty easy to achieve.

With air superiority + CAS I've had even infantry get overruns where they stack wipe an enemy front without even needing to encircle.

>>2030025
Bump
Anon help I want to play but nodlc vanilla is like an entirely different game

>(you)tubers shill Novum Vexilum as THE modern day mod, basically MD but playable
>try it out
>it's shit
Yawn
Back to MD and TFR then

>>2032485
>"modern day" mod
>check North Korea
>fascist
It's trash.

>>2025232
That's a prototype tank built by Venezuela
Mexico had a tank design they used during the Mexican Revolution but I don't know why they didn't use it.

Should I bother building light tanks as a minor nation or should I skip tanks entirely until I can build proper combat and flame medium tanks?

>>1970026 (OP)
They’ll buff Afghanistan to make it a slog and probably ruin the game with focus tree fagging.

When will this shit get like 90% discount? I just want to finally get workshop stuff without begging for update at Smod.

>>2023216
Apart from the helicopter one those don't even look that unfeasible, germans IRL wasted time and effort on much more retarded and unrealistic projects

>germany just gives me all of eastern poland
I did not want this. WTf do I do? I dont have enough troops to defend against soviets when they delclare war

>>2027979
>GBP right for infantry specialist builds because it discounts special forces templates, gives infantry the most stats and plays the best into the strengths of infantry.
SF spirit is for the entire GBP tree and left gives +20% all stats to infantry. GBP right isn't for when your industry can't support anything but infantry, it's for when you expect the majority of your fighting to be in no supply hellholes where everything running on petrol would bog down and die from attrition.

>>2033676
Lmao HOI3keks

>>1975926
Same.

>>1975933
was this written by actual indians

>>2033875
Even worse.ESL modders wrote this

I still don't like the way they went with the East India Company narrative. Especially with the advisors they get being philantrophists irl who established colleges and facilities while the early route implies that the state would go full ancapistan. That and they didn't add Wargoals for you to fight with the UK and the US to prove who's better at capitalism.

What should I look at when making tank, plane and division designs for SP? I'm not asking for exact templates but rather which numbers matter and which don't, I need some universal knowledge that can be used in all mods

>>2038474
>fighters
Air attack, air defense and range, in that order.
>CAS
As much ground attack as possible
>tanks
Soft attack and breakthrough, make sure to stay at or above 8 kph, reliability is not that important
>infantry divs
9x infantry is good enough for everything, support artillery is amazing, line artillery is trash
>tank divs
Make sure that organization is at least 40, also add a single heavy tank battalion with as much armor as possible while staying within 8kph, as 45% of a division's armor rating is calculated off the battalion with the highest armor

>>2038474
>medium tanks
Howitzers, gas engines, three man turrets and radios
Match their speed to the infantry you're using with them, which is ideally motorized/mechanized
Armor doesn't really matter since the AI almost never uses AT in any significant manner
>light tanks
Same deal, but just use mediums
IIRC they need a few armor pips to be safe against infantry piercing too
>heavy tanks
Don't
>fighters
Air attack and defence, but keep in mind they are effectively maxed out at 100
Having speed and/or agility advantage over your enemy will give a multiplier to both, but it's not worth sacrificing base stats for agility and you'll want to have the fastest engines anyway because they give more thrust too
Range is a priority if you expect to fight in places where air regions are the size of Europe but not having to deal with constantly relocating is worth it even in Europe
>CAS
Stack ground attack on the cheap, defensive stats don't do anything against ground fire and you'll want to use CAS in uncontested skies
>naval bombers
Same as CAS (with naval attack obviously)
>strategic bombers
lol, lmao
>divisions
Flame tanks and engineers go in every division
Support artillery goes in every division unless it has a high soft attack without it and you really need the slot for something else
>defensive infantry
Around 15-20 width with one or two line artillery and rangers
Pure infantry meat shields with supports can work as well
Having all of them motorized is likely to cause supply issues even if you can afford it, but keeping a motorized army at hand can be useful for emergencies
>offensive divisions
Around 30-36 width, preferably with armor and mot/mech but special forces infantry can work decently too with planning stacks
Replace engineers with assault engineers if you can
If all you want from your tank divisions is to break front stalemates 30 organization and leg speed is fine, if you want them doing deep penetrations aim for at least 40 org and 8km/h speed

>>2040274
>>2040381
Thanks! Got a couple questions
>reliability is not that important
Why? I've heard that the absolute minimum you must have is 70%
>heavy tanks Don't
Why? Isn't speed the only thing that mediums are better at than heavies? For a 4 km/h division wouldn't heavies be better?
>Having speed and/or agility advantage over your enemy will give a multiplier to both, but it's not worth sacrificing base stats for agility
So how much agility would be enough for a fighter? Or should I just ignore it completely and just stack as much air attack and defense as the engine can carry?
>strategic bombers lol, lmao
Tacticals are better at strat bombing? How so?

>>2041325
>reliability
It technically doesn't matter, but very much matters in practice
Reliability has no effect on combat losses, it only matters for attrition, which you can avoid by not having attrition
Your sources of attrition are:
>field exercise
Which you should do if you have the time and aren't running negative on equipment since experience levels give a massive combat bonus
>bad terrain
Which includes deserts (most of North Africa and Central Asia), jungles (Brazil, Central Africa and Indonesia), mountains (the entirety of China among other places) and like five marshland tiles on the entire world
>being out of supply
Which is almost a given for landlocked regions outside Europe
>I've heard that the absolute minimum you must have is 70%
Reliability gives massive reductions to attrition loss until a certain value past which any increase won't matter at all, which is tied to how much of that equipment is used by the division
The tl:dr is just have it above like 30% for support battalions and at least 80% for anything going into frontline regiments
>heavy tanks
They are prohibitively expensive and have worse terrain modifiers without much to show for it, even if you take having heavy howitzer unlocked as granted
Their biggest advantage over mediums is 10% more hardness, which really isn't worth all their issues
>agility
Just ignore it and stack stats
Agility increases with thrust and decreases with weight, so just filling your weight limit will give you the airframe's base agility if you don't have any -agility modules
Speed and agility bonus is based on the difference between the average values of the wings engaging each other, but there's a hard cap on it even if you tank it your agility to 1 with heavy cannons (not that you should since weight and cost are usually bigger limiting factors than slots)
>Tacticals are better at strat bombing? How so?
They aren't, strategic bombing is just worthless in this game

>>1970026 (OP)
>Install game and decide to play as poland
>be poland but not retarded
>immideadly bring back kingdom
>rapid growth of economy and research
>hitler wants my danzig
>ok chill here;s your danzig you spazzoid
>wtf he took Gdynia too, oh well
>play and improve around warsaw
>rapid growth of economy and research
>stalin wants my backyard
>hmm i dunno what if- *game stutters and i give him clay*
>... oh well have fun
>rapid growth of economy and research
>painter and retard start to fight
>mfw my country looks like that one kid that can't be hurt since he's in magic chalk circle
>painter loses
>"oh shid here's my old stuff"
>painter manages to recover
>give him more shit
>Hungary and czechs and romanians fight on south
>slowly get btfo by soviets
>stop giving him shit ( i forgot to)
>painter slowly loses
>meanwhile i developed nuclear reactor (the better one)
>painterland gets flooded
>i finished basic research tree
>start to make 'modern' army and arm myself for real
>research jet engine and ~ 50% nuclear bomb
>germany is alredy lost
>suddenly brazil appears in danzig and starts to btfo soviets
>quit remove game
it's boring even more boring than stellaris i tryied to install black ice mod but it doesn't wofk on lates fit girl's repack
overall nice 3/10 also spyies suck balls
also how tf are we supposed to fight soviets that country had like 3 lilion in army wtf

>>2041615
yeah, hoi4 gameplay loop is boring and tedious.

i havent seen a single youtube about the prototype vehicles is it so bad not even paid ads is worth the time for influencers?

why cant paradox just fix the engine like making naval and paradrop plans more streamlined

>>2043775
It's a fucking model pack, half of which should be in the base game already

>>2043775
It's literally nothing. If it was in a patch as just free content no one would even be talking about it because it's that insignificant.

>>2023835
AI doesn't make good planes, but they make a lot of them, especially late game.

>>2023879
Because every single indian with HOI4 bought the DLC.

>>2024921
I'd rather have jeets and chinks seething in steam forums than another ham-fisted sermon about le ebil nahtzees.

>>2044518
Too fucking bad, nahtzee.

>>2041468
You forgot weather attrition.
Snow causes attrition basically everywhere but Asia every winter
Rain causes mud randomly throughout the world everywhere
Heat attrition activates if it's 22c anywhere, meaning you'll have tanks being lost to heat stroke in Northern France in springtime
And cold attrition kicks in at 0c so basically everywhere north of the equator for half of each year.

It's exceptionally rare for a division to be under no direct attrition for any significant time and the vast majority of it you have no control over.

>>2044785
Does the supplies support company helps to alleviate that issue?

>>2044947
Logistics battalion reduces the division's supply use and thus can mitigate out of supply attrition, but doesn't directly affect attrition
There's a chief of staff option that reduces division attrition but I'm not sure if it's a percentage of the attrition present (i.e. useless) or a flat subtraction

>>2044975
The wiki seems to hint that is a percentage subtraction.

so fighting in africa is basically a complete waste of time? No techs or designs to overcome the jungle being retarded (especially if you have limited manpower)? This game is so gay, it seems to encourage you to use the cheesiest tactics possible exploiting the shit AI and if you don't you are brutally punished

>>2045078
Wait till you have to fight in south america

>>2045110
won't happen because I find South America lame.

If I just want CAS to CAS and do nothing else, are rocket rails more efficient than heavy bombs?

if you micro correctly you never have to care about reliance or attrition. just dont drive your tank on mountains or mud, dont push during snow, dont send them to africa.
you shouldnt fight in africa at all, u can take all colonies by just invading UK mainland.
a proper barbarossa u can take moscow in 6 months from mars to september

you should infact not push entire border use the tanks and motorized to encircle in bits. eat of chunks to rivers and put infantry just to hold there.

a supportcompany to get 15% more maintenance is worth it of some 40 support goods if it means more soft attack and armor on a tank

>>2041615
>play a ww2 game
>refuse to participate in the war
>sit around for 4 hours building factories
>damn this game is boring, nothing is happening

axis speeches when

>>2047136
>play a ww2 game
>soviets and germans dp me cause i'm a retard (historically accurate)
>sit around for 4 hours losing
>damn this game is entertaining, so much things happening
>>2041615
also played another game with historical ai turned off
>germans lost and i had danzig for free
>soviets rushed me and i won by cheating after reloading save
>anexed resources from sojuz and they turned into russian federation
>somehow i generated 100% world tension
>for some reason denmark had a casus on me after several monts after fall of soviets
>time passes and great britain won it had highest score
>i was 41
>decide to play more
>almost had nukes
>someone spys on me
>caught
>uk usa germany and most of allies concentrate near my border
>wtf they will invade me but for what?
>delete the armies before war is declared
>play some more
>quit game
this is most perplexing game i ever pirated lmao might try bice mod but fitgirl version doesn't support it :(

Can someone offer me some advice? I am struggling to break through in the north of france after capping the benelux. Are there any tips anyone can offer me? I've not got much CAS but I do have air superiority over the region. I am also in poor supply but even improving supply, it's very tricky and I can't break through.

Italy are pushing the south but they're not really reassigning troops down there. The divisions are 26w Infantry with 2 or 3 artillery. It's '39.

Usually I find it a breeze just smashing france even with infantry and then I ramp up tanks for the soviet invasion.

I think my issues are a lack of strong tank divisions, not enough CAS, not utilizing spies and maybe a shitty division template. But is there anything I'm missing or any other strategy?

>>2046844
Or just have reliability and don't suffer all red stockpiles from doing any of that

>>2049245
Northern France facing the benelux is literally just plain tiles with level 4 infrastructure and some of the best supply on the map thanks to the dozens of ports. It is essentially the easiest terrain in the game to attack in.
You should have CAS. It's 39, the war has started. You had 3 years to build your air force and france has basically none to contest you. Where is your CAS?
You should also have a few tank divisions ready. Once again, you knew you'd be invading france in '39, why didn't you take those 3 years of buildup and put together a pair of tank divs you could use to quickly break through to Paris? The quicker you cap France, the quicker you get all its factories and ramp up your own production.

At the end of the day, micro in HOI4 is just about not smashing tanks into mountains. Success is mainly determined by buildup and foresight. If you can't push the easiest place to push where all the advantages are skewed in your favour it's a failure of preparation above anything else. Next time rush tank and plane techs so you can ramp up your tank and plane production early, build rubber refineries so you aren't cucked out of air production when the war starts and try to have at least 2 tank divs ready for Danzig.

If you're building up properly as historical Germany you should have like a half dozen proper tank divs ready for Poland, but you could also put together a bunch of cheapass light tank assault gun divs just to rush those early wars (they do this in multiplayer to counter the possibility of allies denying Czechoslovakia). Being greedy and building up entirely just for Barbarossa is asking to get screwed over when you have nothing ready to quickly claim France and all those juicy civilian factories it has for you.

>>2049348
faggot

>>2049462
Rude

>>2049348
I've made these changes and now I can steam through france. I think the tanks are very much the issue. It stretched the front line enormously and that allowed me to break through at other points. CAS shredded their army too, all of a sudden it was just green bubbles. Thanks

How do I win American Civil War as True Americans in Kaiserreich?
Was it a mistake to take a hard line and assassinate the Commie?

>>2049604
>How do I win American Civil War as True Americans in Kaiserreich?
Get good
>Was it a mistake to take a hard line and assassinate the Commie?
No

>>1970026 (OP)
Completely new HoIIV player, in my first proper games against AI. Vanilla and all.

I figured out the basics, but how do I Communist China? I reclaimcored the bitches around me, built up some industry, crawled out of pit of noresearch with tech and free trade, and am producing as many 16 width inf divisions with supp arty, supp AA and engineers as I can, inf equipment/research all up do date, high command filled, MA/DB grabbed as far as I can with what exp I have, utilizing planning bonuses as much as I can. Found out that even with infiltrations I can't aggressively push Japan for shit, and can just barely push the other China even as they are losing to Japs - turns out inf sucks at pushing entrenched inf, and terrain and supp situation in the southwest is what it is.

Can't bait Japan into attacking me to get spent - whether I declare on their protectorates or use Provoke Japan, they roll up and Phony War at me across the border. If I join the Comintern and call in the Soviets they just end up throwing divs at each other in the Far East to no outcome, and what sov divs come my way can't do shit. Can't into tanks - getting more than 1,5 divs a year would require a ton more industry (and steel) that I have.

Am I supposed to just sit there with my maoist dick in my hand until gooks get nuked by US?

>>2028797

> In singleplayer there's no reason to not take full advantage of planning and just blast through the AI with like 2k soft attack so SF just really never has a context where it's "best" even though it's not necessarily bad.

Because in singleplayer the AI spams spies which decreases planning, making GBP one of the worst doctrines to adopt, even though in multiplayer it's considered the best. There's nothing in singleplayer that comes close to achieving the breakthrough potential of SF, the lack of hard attack isn't an issue because the AI rarely builds armor.

>>2052931
You counter spies in sp the same way you do in mp.
Max out counterintelligence and then just leave all your spies sitting in your capital. A single captured spy is 20% stats from Intel advantage and the odds are so bad that it's basically throwing to have spies active after 1939. Not only that but since you can't "spy" on your own occupied territories and there's weird arbitrary boundaries in spy coverage it just ceases to have any effect once you actually begin pushing.
For example, Germany can get planning on the Belgian border with France and France can't actually put a spy in Belgium to do anything about it.

In multiplayer the weakness of planning is that if you have your tanks in the frontline, enemy tanks will just click you before you actually accumulate the bonus. But I'm singleplayer that's basically moot because the AI only attacks by using battle plans and rarely tries to attack if it thinks it's losing.

>play Ethiopia
>play defense for 3 years
>Italians have morale crash
>attack them
>beat them back one mountain tile
>by the time everyone's dragged their asses across, the italians are entrenched again and impossible to dislodge
>allies eventually sweep in and ruin everything
Is it just fucking impossible to do this? Apparently you could grab the mil in Aussa when they surrender, but that doesn't work either now because their units flip instead of vanishing.

>>2054274
1. Yes, that was nerfed.
2. Git gud (? been a while since I did Lion Stands)

They spy minigame could have been so good. How did paradox make it so lame?

>>2052608

Have you tried going down SFP-R. It's the only doctrine that really gives INF the attack power to push.

>>2052608
As Communist China you have no industry to make tanks and planes and basically nothing going for you except a lot of manpower. So you just have to make infantry work.
The important thing is to take advantage of the fact that Japan is strung out on a narrow, overextended front along the coast of Northern China, and if you break through anywhere and reach the coast you will essentially cut off the entire japanese army.
Japan can't easily replace losses, so if you can just grind your way into a big encirclement while they're distracted by the Nationalists you can inflict a deathblow and they won't be able to recover enough mass to hold their front.

Use planning. It's a huge stat boost and helps overcome infantry's natural disadvantages. Keep your divisions cheap, because infantry loses a lot of equipment while attacking and you don't want to lose equipment that's expensive. You have unlimited bodies, so you can afford to lose men. Infantry equipment is dirt cheap, you can afford to lose lots of that. But support equipment and arty are expensive, so be sparing with them. With all the buffs from Mass Mobilization you get insane recovery speed, so you can just keep hurling divisions into battles and keep them going, leverage your inexhaustible manpower and take tiles the ugly way. Remember, your goal isn't to maximize the damage to your enemy in each individual battle, but to take ground and then destroy the enemy when they're cut off. To take ground you just need to eventually drain their org. To drain their org you just need to keep feeding bodies into a neverending battle. It's not pretty but it works.

Be sure to pick your battle somewhere far from an airfield so you're not getting mulched by CAS the whole way, and keep a few cavalry divs in reserve that you can use to rush through if you make a breakthrough. Once you can cut off enemy supply battles become much easier. Once they're trapped against the coast it's just an execution.

>>2055029
Refer to "AI_control" and the number of players for HoI3.

since we already got a germany rework and we are getting a asian rework next what else would you like to see?

>>2057396
SEA focus trees.

>>2057396
Some reworks of the US, UK+Commonwealth and Mexican focuses. The US focus is not as dated as the Together For Victory bunch but it is already showing its age, I would like to see an enhanced version of the US and British focuses just like they did with Germany, Italy and the Soviets. The Commonwealth might be hardee given most of them are barebones with Canada being the exception, I don't expect a large India-like focus but something a bit larger and more polished than what they have right now would be good to see.
As for Mexico it really needs a rework, compared to the ToA it really is showing its age, while countries lile Chile or Argentina can core the entire Hispanic Sphere Mexico only gains claims which somehow increase world tension, the Chilean and Argentinian focuses don't do that be it fascist or mapuchean/monarchist for Chile, plus it still has some generico generals when there's plenty of pics of those generals.

>>2032502
Sorry to hear that, comrade

Thoughts? I just hope they don't do some retarded schizo formable shit like what they tried with GoE

>>2057494
Country packs are done by 1 guy.

Alt-history will never be serious. Something (you), and the rest of the faggot-ass HoI4 "community" needs to get the fuck over.

>>2057498
>implying that I'm mad

No. I just don't want another repeat of the GoE fiasco

Why did we accept the existence of the tank as completely normal? This thing is just absurd. Look at it.

>>2058132
It do be looking mighty and comfy, though.

>>2058132
This.
Tanks are the niggers of the battlefield. On the other hand planes are the so fucking good they decide naval battles.

>>2057508
>he calls GoE "fiasco"
>implying he's not mad

>>2058220
Shut the fuck up, chair force. Your job is to support infantry.

>>2000599
>bigger question why are armored cars even in the game? they are almost the most worthless land unit even worse than early motorized, so why do they exist? Noob trap?
I use them for the occupation divisions because I can't figure out how equipment tags work for tanks.

>>2017759
>>historical focuses on
>>France denies Czehcoslovakia,
Historical focuses weren't on, or you fucked with something.

>>2019207
Japan and italy, go right.
Anyone else, go left.

>come back after not playing for years.
When did they add this?

>>2058560
The most recent Germany rework. Came with Götterdämmerung.

>>2058569
Ah okay. I didn't buy that DLC. Surprised they didn't pay-wall it.

>>2058570
Only historical Germany is free, similar to how historical Finland is also free.

>>2000599
Not including them in the tank designer was a strange oversight.

>>2058978
the Monarchist Germany (both absolute and constitutional) paths from WtT are also free

>>2058318
if you get the tags to work light tanks are cheaper and better at occupation

>>2061029
I know but how do you get the tags to work.

>>2061187
jesus anon if only I fucking knew I generally just don't use light tanks for occupation and that way I don't need to worry about it.

>>2061187
>>2061196
What's difficult about it? Make a tank and give it a tag you don't use, then make a garrison div and give it the same tag as the tank. Alternatively disable all but the correct tank from the garrison. Then just set the garrison as your garrison template.

>>2061029
>>2061204
>tag
division template

>>2060993
No shit, the update to Gottedamerung made it free, but compared to their updated variants and the new communist tree they show the reason Germany needed a revamp.

So I played this game years and years ago.
I remember it was pretty much impossible to lose as USA or England because the AI was too stupid to Naval Invasion.
Is it still like that?

>>2061502
??
Templates have a armor tag that you can use to limit the type of tank it gets, that's useful if you say actually use light tanks in your divisions or as tank recons but also make empty light tanks for garrisons for cheap, you just tag the equipment and templates differently.

>>2000599
I fucking love armored cars. They're loads of fun to scout in.
It's all fun until the PTRDs show up.

>>2061515
As long as you don't lose your navy they will still be unable to. The AI does naval invade if they can though.

>>2061649
but that's in a different better game

>>2061515
That's still the case. The AI will naval invade you if it can, though its invasions are kind of random, schizo and piecemeal. But the AI is terrible at building and managing navy so as long as you start as someone with a strong navy like the UK, the Axis will literally never be able to wrest naval supremacy from you to enable their invasions. Even if you leave Germany to solo the Soviet Union and leverage all of the resources of Eurasia it will just be trapped in Fortress EVROPA until you choose the time and place of its demise.

>>2061794
Allies aren't supposed to lose navy

>>1999219
I met him on discord back in like 2016 and out of all of the YouTubers I've had the displeasure of knowing he's probably the most annoying and retarded. He would get in internet fights with teenagers all the time and somehow manage to come out looking the most retarded. I managed to cap him on a bokoen stream and he rage quit on the spot.

>>2061794
i dont understand how paradox is so shit at ai.
theres literally only 1 meta for everything. 1 airplane design 1 tank, u can just shitout destroyers and subs and win.
i never really had ai subs harass me as axis
i never seen ai use good marine templates for naval invasion or paradrop.
i never see them use 7inf 2art or good support.
theres no strategy just build mills really.
how the fuck have they not done a decent job in 8 years
even sloppy 4 tanks 4 motorized can push through entrenched forts and ai never builds it
just putting a single AA support would void cas exploiting but ai never does

>>2061817
Allies are supposed to use Navy if the Axis wins in Eurasia and leverages all the resources of two continents into building a world-beating navy to cross the ocean. That was literally the fear that allied leaders explicitly talk about. One of the speeches the game plays on historical even outlines that scenario.

As the allies you should be on a time limit to stop the axis before they get big enough to challenge you on the seas.

Hell I think it's totally silly how the pacific naval war plays out. In reality Japan held the initiative for months because they literally had the bigger navy in the Pacific after Pearl Harbour, and it wasn't until Midway that the tide turned back in US favour. In game the US never has to build a single ship and their starting fleet is enough to just beat the AI Japan without even needing to pay attention. It's basically impossible to lose as the allies and that's just kind of boring.

>>2061864
>just putting a single AA support would void cas exploiting but ai never does
The AI's templates are actually much better now, much closer to 'standard' singleplayer meta designs. All majors always have AA in every infantry battalion and typically they'll get up to around 90 piercing by lategame.

The problem is that the AI can't adapt its designs. 1 Support AA is nice for reducing CAS damage but if you're under red air and being CAS'd to death, it's not enough. At that point you need multiple AA line battalions and need to actually be inflicting losses on their CAS planes, but of course the AI doesn't have any way to adapt its designs and counter what you're doing, so it just dies to CAS.

The main issue with the AI--aside from its serial problems with distributing divisions along its fronts--is that it can't handle production well. If you tag over to Germany lategame you'll see an utterly bottomless stockpile of infantry equipment that far exceeds what its manpower can utilize, another near-bottomless stockpile of support equipment, and then shortages of everything else. The AI will have 10 tank divisions in training while it's in the whole 10000 mediums and 20000 lights entirely from attrition in the Pripet Marshes and all of its existing tank divisions are running around at 20% strength. It will run out of AA, artillery, AT, trucks, trains and basically everything else but it will continue to produce an ungodly amount of infantry equipment and basically nothing else.

Honestly, the AI should probably just fucking cheat these things. Why are we writing complex decisionmaking algorithms to simulate backend shit the player never sees? Just cheat it.

>>2061864
>i never see them use 7inf 2art or good support.
>theres literally only 1 meta for everything. 1 airplane design 1 tank, u can just shitout destroyers and subs and win.
> u can just shitout destroyers and subs and win.
You haven't played the game in years lol.

>>2046759
No.
Bomb Locks and then Heavy Bomb Locks are both the most weight-efficient and IC-efficient sources of ground attack. Everything else is just straight up inferior.
The key benefit to Rocket Rails is that they are very light and don't have an Agility penalty, so they are ideal for hybrid planes that want to dogfight (where Agility matters) and CAS afterwards, or to fit in one more module where your current engine tech couldn't manage another Bomb Lock.

>>2061864
7/2 is a trap, anon. It always has been.
Line artillery is bad, one of the worst line battalions in the game. All of the """meta""" singleplayer infantry templates like 9/1, 7/2, etc. are all noob traps perpetuated by shill youtubers that didn't actually know any better.

I mean you don't actually need optimal templates to beat the AI, which is why so many people that don't do the math fell for the artillery meme, but it is actively making your divisions weaker and more expensive for no benefit.

>>2062253
To be fair, the multiplayer meta is not the same as the singleplayer meta. The reason why org walls are good is because they're built to dull aggression from other players and they optimize for IC. That optimization is based on the assumption that you're playing in a team where there will be someone who has an optimal cas design/an optimal cas design/an optimal tank design and you can rely on them being positioned correctly when they're needed. In single player if you're not the one making strong tank units to micro, no one is making them and your org wall is just going to sit on the frontlines doing nothing.
If you're optimizing for something else (i.e. research, independence, speed) then different designs become viable/optimal. Space marines objectively beat 7/2s at parity, but if you just need raw soft attack for a war before 39 and you don't have the industry to go cas then 7/2s are functional and aren't expensive enough to be prohibitive. In fact, with relatively low factory counts your production tends to be lopsided enough that you naturally have a surplus of artillery anyway relative to infantry equipment, so the math balances out and you're only sacrificing HP and Org. You also only have to research artillery, rather than devoting one of your two research slots to the 7 different techs you need for tanks.

But like you've said, the singleplayer meta isn't that sweaty in the first place. The industry you need to completely wall the AI is tiny until nukes, and the AI is always late to nukes.

>>2062033
simplest solution is force ai to go down decentralized production, give it a 20% bonus to retention and set some if rules when shortage become -300 move factory from infantry arms to x.
it seems ai only goes focused production and then cant handle modular losses

>>2062398
multiplayer meta is irrelevant to the discussion of AI, any major will be played by a human and minors are a joke anyway.
AI discussion only matters for singleplayer
theres a difference between >can ai beat this meme exploit stack. to being generally competent
no one expect ai to counter 40width heavy tank.
but i should not be able to roll through Belgium with 4 light tanks with ease
1 AT support would counter that

>>2062404
All of that can be true, but it's completely irrelevant to the core point that optimizing to the multiplayer meta isn't the same thing as optimizing to the singleplayer meta.
In any case if you make the AI add AT to every unit, you don't make them substantially harder to beat - you just make light tanks non-viable and AI germany stalemate more. Players will just adapt to the meta and invest their IC into something more economical against AI templates and you end up in exactly the same static meta as before.

id argue the worst weakness of ai is its inability to use generals or frontlines. tabbing over i see all greyed out no leaders, 20 3 unit stacks spread out.
ai is not min-maxxing putting entrenchment bonus generals to hold fronts, or putting breakthrough and attack bonuses to focused groups
you can easily get 50% entrenchment as france or prebuild 3 forts along belgium rivers
but ai keeps shuffling units around losing all entrenchment.

desu entrenchment should be rebuilt from unit specific to province general bonus. even if u swap two divisions place the entrenchment bonus stays, it would immensely help AI.

they should rebuild backend math for forts so forts chance entrenchment to be a +base and %max so entrenchment start at 1-5 per fort level. then allows passive holding to build up max% per infantry in a division buildup.
entrenchment % defense and softattack should have a different addative modifier to units so infantry get more benefit than a tank motorized battalion so u cant just exploit build moving cheap infantry around to then settle defensive tanks in the province.

>>2062404
>>2062408
Which isn't to say the templates should be as janky as they are right now, but the solution needs to be more holistic/considered. I'm fine with AI belgium getting rolled over by light tanks in 37/38/39 but if britain still isn't using AT in 42 against a tank build germany then that's bad, obviously

>>2062409
>desu entrenchment should be rebuilt from unit specific to province general bonus. even if u swap two divisions place the entrenchment bonus stays, it would immensely help AI.
I don't think it should completely stay, but it should definitely not totally disappear. If you're doing that though, there should also be ways to mitigate/undo it (like artillery support or continuous assaults)
Troop rotation is a thing.

>>2062398
No anon, I mean that artillery is not an efficient source of soft attack period. The UI is designed to give you the impression that it is, but in reality it's not. You deal more damage in combat with pure infantry than with any combination of infantry and artillery. It doesn't matter if you're talking sp or mp.

If you need to add a more stats to your inf, the best ways to do that are by adding light tank recon with a properly designed light tank or by just adding a single dirt cheap medium tank battalion with a howitzer. Just cut line arty from your gameplay entirely and results will improve. It's not about orgwalling, like arty is literally just worse than infantry per width

>>2062516
>You deal more damage in combat with pure infantry than with any combination of infantry and artillery
That is not true
Line artillery gives you a bigger soft attack number for the same IC and massively so for the same combat width, you just stay in combat for a shorter time and take more damage because of the reduced org/hp.

If you need to break a tile and you don't have the industry/research for mediums then using the surplus artillery you already have is genuinely efficient.

>>2062516
id argue GW arty is shit balanced. there is a niche period where 39 arty is good enough for defense entrenchment bonus arty 43 is just shit compared to rockets.
but any 39 ic should be going to medium tanks for attack its just a nice to have as a major
>>2062522
you should not be attacking with line arty or inf units. its just really good for soft attack on the defensive per ic

>>2062644
>you should not be attacking with line arty or inf units
Ok, thanks for that advice :)
What should I be attacking with with my 2 fucking factories as bulgaria?

>>2062646
Umm sweaty, this is the GroBgermaniums map painting game...

>>2062647
Even on germany infantry+cas is the most braindead and economical way to play. If you care and have the fuel for it you can do mech, but tanks are really just for fun, rp or space marines

>>2062028
>As the allies you should be on a time limit to stop the axis before they get big enough to challenge you on the seas.
That simply can't happen within the bounds of the game, battleships take too long to build, allied fears were a meme in real life and so are they in game, you have consumed too much propaganda basically. US outproduced the entire world in naval capacity by 43

>they literally had the bigger navy in the Pacific after Pearl Harbour
>It's basically impossible to lose as the allies and that's just kind of boring.
Allies are supposed to win navy, you don't pick allies to "be hekkin epic on the seas", you pick the Japanese or Italians and try to win against the Americans or British and for that US and British needs to have big enough fleet that it makes victory hard fought and interesting. You are fighting a ghost here, don't pick the allies and whine that the navy is boring because allies are the naval opponent for a naval game and that's why they have such a strong navy.

>>2062253
Line artillery is fine in single player if you actually use your infantry. The reason org walls are good in multiplayer is because you are playing against another human and the org wall buys you 2 more seconds to react before you lose your tanks to their counter attack. Play and speed 4 and battle plan and suddenly artillery becomes really important so you don't immediately lose all your infantry battles.

>pick Mobile Warfare for the spirit that makes adding vehicle battalions free
>because the designers are retarded, each battalion needs to be individually, manually whitelisted for the effect rather than using a simple tagging system
>the bonus only applies to base tanks/mot/mech, not to SPAA, SPGs, TDs, amphibious tanks, amtracs or any armoured support companies because Pdx literally just forgot to manually add them.
This game is so fucking stupid

>>2062673
I guess this is really hard for people to wrap their head around.
No, pure infantry divs aren't just org walls. Artillery is literally a bad, inefficient source of soft attack. The stat card misleads you. You aren't cutting the artillery to make an org wall, you're cutting the artillery so that your divisions have more soft attack per width and thus more soft attack in the battle.

The problem with artillery is multifaceted:
>Width
They are 3 combat width per battalion instead of the usual 2 and they don't actually have enough soft attack to make this increased width efficient. The measure of how combat-effective your divisions are and how well they will perform in battle is how many stats you can fit into combat width. You always want to be able to fill combat width completely, whether you're attacking or defending. Artillery being 50% wider is a huge problem because that effectively means 50% fewer stats per width. This would be okay if artillery's added stats were huge, but they actually just aren't
>terrain
Artillery has bad terrain modifiers compared to infantry. Almost as bad as medium tanks, actually. This means in practice it's usually costing your division some stats, meaning what it is effectively adding is deceptively lower than you see on the stat card

>>2062706
>They are 3 combat width per battalion instead of the usual 2 and they don't actually have enough soft attack to make this increased width efficient. The measure of how combat-effective your divisions are and how well they will perform in battle is how many stats you can fit into combat width. You always want to be able to fill combat width completely, whether you're attacking or defending. Artillery being 50% wider is a huge problem because that effectively means 50% fewer stats per width.
That depends on doctrine and nation. If you're playing a major, you'll always fill the combat width. Most minors will mostly not.
I may be completely talking out of my ass but don't the mountain guns a couple of units get also invert that terrain point as well? In any case, I don't think anyone needs to be told that special forces are good units.

>>2062706
>No, pure infantry divs aren't just org walls. Artillery is literally a bad, inefficient source of soft attack.
This is just wrong though, like I mean insanely stupid thing to say. I don't know what you are smoking with this argument honestly. But to put this one to the rest once and for all here's the comparison
At game start on germany a division of 3 infantry has 18 soft attack (3x6 makes sense). A division of 2 artilery has 50 soft attack (2x25 without the 1936 arty tech btw). Both of these have 6 width and the way stats work you can have 10 infantry and 2 arti or 13 infantry and the difference is exactly the same. Artillery absolutely trounces infantry in terms of attack. Let's be thorough though and run some more numbers. Arty has more hard attack as well as breakthrough and piercing. It loses on defense hp and org e.g. the defensive stats. Even if you account for the higher IC cost 72 art x 3.5 -> 252 vs 300 inf eq x 0.5 -> 150 it's still IC efficient. It's also manpower efficient with 1000 vs 3000 manpower used, again both raw stats per combat width and stats per IC spent.
In 1939 soft is 28.3 vs 66
In 1942 soft is 39.6 vs 88.4
Max tech it's 41.4 vs 108.8 but the game ought to not go that far, you can also switch to rocket arty for
Artillery will always be more soft attack per IC and per combat width and especially per manpower. MIO gives +5% soft attack on infantry but that requires the entire MIO to be complete, for the vast majority of the game Arty is actually ahead on that front too simply because it's traits come earlier in the tree. For your doctrine there are far more arty only options particularly superior firepower dispersped/integrated support which basically only effects artilery as there's no "infantry support companies" and all general soft attack buffs just make the gap bigger. I shouldn't have to mention but there's also batallion effects like how recon or ranger companies give artillery more soft attack but not infantry.

>>2062706
>stacking modifiers
Infantry receive a huge amount of stacking bonuses to their stats from a variety of sources, which increase as the game progresses. This makes infantry scale incredibly well as you access these bonuses. They come from research, equipment, MIOs, general traits, high command, doctrine etc. Artillery gets comparatively fewer stacking bonuses. Even the stat increase from researching new equipment is considerably worse for artillery. In practice this means that by midgame an infantry battalion will be adding more effective stats in combat than an artillery one, but it gets even worse. Because of how stat bonuses work, adding artillery to an infantry battalion actually penalizes these stacking bonuses.
Modifiers in battle stack multiplicatively, meaning the more different modifiers you have the better. Infantry benefits the most from this, since they have the most possible sources of stacking modifiers, so you don't want to water down those bonuses with a non-infantry battalion unless it's REALLY GOOD (ie maybe a tank).
>cost
On top of costing more IC and thus raising the whole cost of your division, artillery also penalizes your HP. In practice this means more equipment losses in combat, of which more of those losses are more expensive equipment. Pure infantry divisions have higher HP, which not only means fewer equipment losses but also means you can include more support companies, with several that provide considerably more soft-attack per IC than most line battalions. You can, for example, stack support artillery, support rocket artillery and support super heavy artillery in an infantry division for something that has more soft attack and more HP than a mixed inf/arty battalion for similar IC.

As an addendum so we're clear: Support artillery companies are extremely good and worthwhile most of the time. Line Artillery battalions are the bad ones.

>>2062737
I don't think anyone is claiming mass assault artillery is better than infantry
For small nations early into the game who will already have lopsided production, line artillery fills a niche

>>2062516
>or by just adding a single dirt cheap medium tank battalion with a howitzer.
The absolute cheapest medium tank worth a shit costs 7.6 IC, a GW chassis with a one man light turret, a CS gun, bogies, riveted armor and literally nothing else
That's more than twice of the IC cost of one GW artillery equipment, and you'd need 3 battalions to match the 2 line artillery's SA
Later on when you unlock actual guns (by researching better field guns mind you) you can match or even exceed their SA with just 2 battalions
The dirt cheap tanks will also have worse reliability until the '40 chassis, and will always need fuel and more supplies than line artillery
And keep in mind a medium tank battalion needs 50 equipment to the line artillery's 36
>>2062706
With latest infantry equipment, all the infantry soft attack bonus techs researched, GW artillery, no artillery tech whatsoever, no doctrines and no support battalions...
7/2 still has 146.6 soft attack to 10inf's 136, a roughly 6% bonus
That's more than every terrain attack penalty except amphibious' -8,8%

>>2062751
>With latest infantry equipment, all the infantry soft attack bonus techs researched, GW artillery, no artillery tech whatsoever, no doctrines and no support battalions...
>7/2 still has 146.6 soft attack to 10inf's 136, a roughly 6% bonus
>10 soft attack
And then you factor your Infantry high command, your doctrines, your general, etc.
And you arrive at the cheaper division being stronger per width, stronger per IC and taking fewer losses because of its HP. This is why I'm telling you the stat card is deceptive, because ~60 width worth of infantry and support companies are always going to have more stats in battle where all those stacking bonuses apply, but you can't see that in the division designer.


>tank stuff
You miss the point.
Infantry is cost effective for everything except Breakthrough and hard attack. These are the only stats that infantry can't cover for itself. So when you're adding something to your infantry division that's going to dilute its bonuses, you want to give it breakthrough or hard attack. For SP, pretty much just breakthrough obviously.
Tanks are the main source of breakthrough, which is why putting one tank battalion into an infantry division makes sense and is a net increase in combat ability. An added benefit is that the tank also provides hardness to reduce incoming damage, armour that may prevent piercing and more soft attack. But you aren't adding it to maximize soft attack, that's just an added benefit on top of the breakthrough. In practice the cost difference between an artillery piece and a tank doesn't matter while on the offensive, because the added breakthrough will always reduce losses more than the cost difference and pay for itself in a few battles.

>>2062769
>And then you factor your Infantry high command, your doctrines, your general, etc.
Doctrines favor artillery just straight up so does high command, both have higher bonuses for artillery. The only thing out of that list that actually favors infantry is the infantry commander general trait which you would not pick if you are using org wall strategies with your infantry in the first place and if you do pick it it still benefits artillery more because 10 inf division that gains +10% gains less soft attack than a 7/2 that gains +8% because the 7/2 has higher base soft attack
So that's 3/3 for artillery on that list

>being stronger per width
wrong
>stronger per IC
wrong
>and taking fewer losses because of its HP
That only matters on defense, you are winning when you attack. Artillery division that wins takes lot less casualties than an infantry division that doesn't win.
>because ~60 width worth of infantry and support companies are always going to have more stats in battle where all those stacking bonuses apply
You have not given one "stacking bonus" that actually benefits infantry more than it does artillery.

>Infantry is cost effective for everything except Breakthrough and hard attack.
It's not

You are just so incredibly wrong it hurts. My guy, infantry is the weakest possible source of soft attack in the game that actually has soft attack. It's the maximum defense, minimum offense base line unit that everything else upgrades from.

>>2062782
He's repeating a metafag argument from an eceleb without understanding it

>>2062804
It's really unfortunate when retards like this hear off org walling in some MP meta and then spew garbage like this here without having even a basic grasp of game mechanics. Like it's fine if you are wrong on some minutia of an obscure mechanic but to legitimately believe that infantry gives more soft attack than artillery is just baffling to me, how does a man arrive into that state of mind is truly a mystery.

>>2062782
>N-nuh uh
Concession graciously accepted. I don't know why this fact, which is universally understood everywhere outside of the SP youtuber cult sends said cult into such conniptions but it's a good laugh every time.

>>2062818
Concession accepted I guess

>>2062769
>>10 soft attack
Yes, between the absolute best regular infantry can get in pure stats and the day 1 artillery tech every shithole gets
>And then you factor your Infantry high command
Which gives a smaller bonus than artillery high command
>your doctrines
There's exactly one doctrine focusing on shitting out as much infantry as possible, obviously don't use line artillery with that
SF hands out SA like candy to everyone, which benefits artillery's higher base attack much more
GBP right's infantry specific +10% isn't enough to tip the scales, especially if you use rangers and mountaineers like you should
>your general
Your general gives divisional bonus attack, and guess what 7/2 counts as
You also forgot the absolutely massive +15% SA rangers give to line artillery, and the fact that artillery just has way more base attack (even normalized to width with the most severe technology disparity possible) so any bonuses are going to be much more impactful than the same given to infantry

can someone explain to me why there is a shittification of states. why are there so many pointless small shitstates, iraq, iran afghainstan having 1 state split to 4, bloatening pointless micro.

there was also no reason to att 7 states to sweden.
i hate all the excessive micro in shitholes.
from a building perspective give me one mega state in a region with 30 slots, thats unlocked based on year/tech/focus.

>>2065967
I don't understand your question. It's good that the map has granularity, it doesn't matter if there's 1 state or 10, 10 states simply enable more interesting things to happen because lot of other mechanics depend on states like weather and borders.
If you are playing in those areas then it's extra important to have the granularity there for various reasons. If you aren't then just battle plan over the area because meme countries have no armies. There's no extra micro involved in any step regardless, you don't click states for anything.

>>2065967
How does adding states cause more micro?
The only time this is even marginally reasonable is shit like Iran having way too many airzones

For everything else, having more airbases and supply centres makes micro way less painful

>>2066397
>way too many airzones
The opposite is even worse where nothing but heavy fighters can effectively support the front because paradox arbitrarily decided to make air zones the size of Europe

>>2066424
Just go cas only

Holy shit, the new focus expansion for Afghanistan looks crazy.