Hearts of Iron 2?

[Tookie]

I just bought Hearts of Iron 2 to help control my craving for SC2, and while I enjoy HoI2 I feel that it is far too complicated. Do not get me wrong I am having fun micromanaging "everything", but this game makes me want SC2 even more.

Not that SC2 is less complicated, but I feel that it will be more accesible, (FUN) because it is slightly less involved. Also Im not crazy about the the combat system in HOI2. Im happy to see that the combat in SC2 is more like a combination of SC1 and Panzer General.

Speaking of complexity, how deep will some of the Features in SC2 be? Will they be as complex and as through as those found in HOI2?

While I enjoy a bit of micromanagement I also like to "Play" the game and move my units around the battlefield and not spend all my time looking at micromanagement windows!

[pzgndr]

If you have played SC1 or the SC1 demo, you will find that SC2 is only slightly more complicated. Game turns still play about the same way. Here's a short summary of things that are noticeably different and will require just a few more brain cells:

- New attack-move feature in addition to the standard move-attack. Players continue to play one unit at a time and there is no stacking. Also, amphibious transports now move and unload in the same turn, but require a full turn to embark.

- New HQ attachment feature. In addition to the standard automatic attachments, there is Auto-Assist and Manual to allow players to specify which units are attached to which HQ in range.

- New Air Fleet and Subs mode settings. Players can now set AFs to intercept only, escort only, or be grounded. Subs can run silent and not perform convoy raiding.

- Optional force pool limits and production delays. This one requires players to plan ahead better. This may require the most adjustment for some players.

- No automatic research tech upgrades. Players have to manually upgrade individual units, and pay for each upgrade. (No more freebies!) With multiple techs available, players may also customize their units with different techs.

- Consumable research chits. Now when you get an advance, you have to reinvest in new chits to continue R&D. There is also an editor option to disable this feature.

- Optional weather effects. This new feature really affects the ebb and flow of combat, especially in Russia.

There are many other new features that are more subtle. Bottom line is SC2 is just as fun to play as SC1 and not much more complicated. A 1939 "classic" campaign will be included that retains some of the old SC1 features - no force pool limits, no consumable research chits, etc. Players can then toggle optional weather and production delays and such on/off as they transition into SC2. Methinks once you try the new features and get used to them, you won't go back to the classic game too often.

[Agent Smith]

any chance the 'Tactics II scenario' will ship with finished product or be available in a scenario pool?

Will battlefront host a location for mods and scenarios? or will it be relying on 3rd party sites?

[guinty1]

HO2 is a pile of **** really...wanted to like the game so much i stuck with it for 2 long (same as i did with HOI1) but so much happens at times u think your at work instead of trying to play a game.

[Tookie]

Yea those are my sentiments exactly! Please release SC2 soon HOI2 is too complicated!

[Edwin P.]

HOI2 is a good game; however, I as others simply find Strategic Command more fun to play and much less complicated.

What I do like about HOI is:

The historical chrome that the game is built around - including pictures of the generals and ministers of each country along with player selection of economic and military doctrines.

The ability to accept or decline a diplomatic proposal.

The editor. You can fine tune the AI and create new events.

An economic system that places greater importance on controlling or trading resources - oil, metals and rare metals.

----------------------------------------------

[Retributar]

Thank-You Edwin P. for expressing your evaluation of which i am of the same mind as you!.

I like games for all-seasons...eg: if im tired i like a less mentally challenging game...because i simply want to play a good fun-game with less head-work.

Conversely...there i times when i crave a Micro-Managing/Complex game to get into!.

This is not to say that a less Complex game is a lesser game...it is just an alternative game-style which i myself need...i need a variety of levels of games...not just one-type!.

[Edwin P.]

Thank You Retributor. Its good to see I am not alone in liking HOI.

There are many features in HOI that would port over well to SC2 and not increase its complexity.

Example 01:

A single screen where players have the option to select the chief of staff for their army, navy and air departments for 25MPP each. Each chief of staff would offer a different bonus and related penalty. Once choosen you would see a picture of the selected branch chief along with a short text bio.

Air Chief of Staff

1. General XXX - A Navy Man at heart, his selection gives air units a bonus when attacking naval units.

2. General XXX - A true Dog Figther, his selection reduces the build times or Unit Build Limit for Air Fleets and increases the build times for Bombers

3. General XXX - The Carpet Bomber, his selection reduces the build times for Bombers while increasing the build time for Air Fleets

4. General XXX - Grants no bonus or penalty.

5. General XXX - A consumate bureaucrat selecting this general gives a +1 build limit bonus to all air units and a -1 build limit penalty to naval units.

Of course, changing a Chief Of Staff, once selected will cost you XXXX and may be rejected.

Example: For USA to change their Air Chief of Staff would cost 50MPP and is 75% likely to be accepted. If it is rejected you lose the 50MPP. For the USSR to Change the Chief of Staff the cost is 75MPP but is 100% likely to be accepted (as no one argues with Stalin).

Example 2: Expand this Screen to Include a Cabinet Official for Research

If you elect to fill this position you gain a minister who may (1 in 4 chance) override your research investment decisions but gives you a bonus when researching the selected area.

Cabinet Official A: Favors Air Defense and Gun Laying Radar with a +2% bonus to research in this area. IF you invest 1 chit in Armor there is a 25% that the chit is redirected to Air Defense or Gun Laying Radar.

Cabiner Offical B: Favors Submarine Warfare with a 2% bonus in this area. If you invest 1 chit in Armor there is a 25% that the chit is redirected to Advanced Submarines.

Perhaps allow a player to assign a HQ unit to research:

Example:

If you assign Eisenhower to Research (Armor) you gain a +1% bonus to your chance to develop a tech advance in this area. However, while commanding the research efforts this HQ unit cannot command or supply field units and must be based in their home country.

A neutral US or USSR player may want to build a HQ unit and assign it to direct research while waiting for his nation to become active. PS: For each turn a HQ unit directs research its readiness/morale drops by 10%.

MODIFIED: For each turn a HQ unit directs research its STRENGTH drops by 1 point, Min of 4. This reflects a focus on managing research efforts, not combat units.

Thus in my ideal world HQ unit commands include:

Promote - to support other HQ units

Demote - assign to support combat units

Retire - reclaim to purchase another HQ unit

Research - bonus for research % at cost of Str Point

Disband - to reclaim MPPs

I would also rate each HQ unit for Land, Air, and Naval effectiveness. One General might be more effective at directing Air units, and another at directing Land units.

Example: Rommel: Land (100%), Air (80%), Naval (50%)

Example: Dolittle: Land (80%), Air (100%), Naval (80%).

[ January 23, 2006, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Tookie]

Please do not misunderstand me. I enjoy the high level of complexity found in HOI2. I too would like to see some of its features ported over to SC2, but some of the features make for a tedious and time consuming game. What im hoping for in SC2 is a perfect balance between complexity and fun gameplay elements. I truly hope that SC2 is not just an "improved" version of SC1! Make it more complex, but also make sure that any micromanagement required doesn't feel like homework.