HOI4? - What do you see in it?

[markshot]

Okay, I own more games than I can play including all the CM stuff, but it is my happiness of old age.

So, I have spent months on HOI4 (got all the DLCs too).  Conceptually, it is a very linear wargame:  politics -> economy -> production -> recruiting -> battle -> settlement.

Now, PDS has tried to make it tactical by including terrain affects, speed affects, strength of defense, armor breakthough ability, and a role for planes and naval.  But even still the battlefield is small ... but any more more provinces (hexes) and performance would be horrible.  (as everyone begins in 1936)

Now, given that this is a wargaming group and HOI4 is like #50 in the Steam 100, there must be players here.  So, what do you see in it?

I was keen on giving it a spin, since I wanted to see if PDS captured WWII, and I think they failed.  The game is decent; and it goes without saying that PDS = overpriced.

But I was wondering what others might see in it?

I think games like CK2/CK3 after 2 courses on middle ages capture the flavor of the period quite well, but I think HOI4 is kind of a lack luster exercise with weak AI both strategic and combat.

So, what do you see in it?

PS:  If you do seriously like vanilla HOI4, and want to up your game Expert AI 4 is a very good mod for addressing quite a few shortcomings.

[BletchleyGeek]

I just see a blur... There is too much going on at the same time, all the time in that game. I see it essentially as a sandbox for alt history. Which is fine and means I don't play it anymore - I bailed out in 2018 or so.

HoI 3 - when they managed to get it running which certainly wasn't at release, more like two years after that - eventually became a  decent strategic level war game. Still the air and naval war systems never quite worked or the AI was programmed robustly enough to handle them. I didn't like very much the HOI 4 system of "fronts" etc. that did away with having player defined orders of battle... campaigning armies in WW2 are more than a line on a map with a names close to them. I don't know if in the years since there have been any improvement in this area, or they have just gone heavy on the " nation roleplaying" aspects.

The strategic war game I have quite liked in recent times is the terribly named WarPlan.

[markshot]

I find the few orders for land combat are only good as a default.  So, I will put infantry on front or defensive line, but micro armor for the important stuff.

Once, you got a line, it will fill in an progress behind your armor and keep supply open.  Finding the weak spot and plains is the key, because the fastest units are 3X the speed of the slowest.

But tactical is just poor and I would rather be looking at a CM map.  Unlike the other games, they and sandboxes with many options.  This your only option is to win, and who wants to play Bulgaria to a stupid AI Hitler, Churchill, or Stalin?

[BletchleyGeek]

48 minutes ago, markshot said:

But tactical is just poor and I would rather be looking at a CM map.  Unlike the other games, they and sandboxes with many options.  This your only option is to win, and who wants to play Bulgaria to a stupid AI Hitler, Churchill, or Stalin?

I guess that in theory it is possible to have a smaller country subjugate the whole of Europe without cheating. In theory. In Europa Universalis there is an achievement called the Three Hills (?) which is awarded if you conquer the world playing the of Kingdom of Ryukyu (Okinawa)...