Hearts Of Iron

[Fritz]

We discussed this game some prior to migration.

The latest patch makes this game much more interesting. If you have the game but have not played it since early January it might be worth revisiting.

[STK]

especially if you add the Bolt Balanced Mod to 1.03.

[ACStrider]

Yeah, prior to migration, I was asking about the game. Would someone do me a huge favor and describe the type of person who would like this game (maybe that's the best way for me to see if it's for me). Or if that's not your cup of tea, give me some likes and dislikes. Any comments are helpful. Thanks a lot everyone!

[Blackadar]

It looked pretty interesting, but I was wondering how close it was to Europa Universalis 2.

[Fritz]

By the look and feel you will know it is from the same people. Beyond that it is very different.

EU2 is all about the politics, with the military part taking a secondary (but vital) role. In HOI that is flipped. You have 3 politial factions (allies, axis, commintern (commies)). You win and lose as a side. Winning comes as a result of occupation of victory locations. HOI has a more complex combat system, and much more varied unit selection.

If you have some more specific questions, I will be happy to answer them.

[sachmo71]

Fritz,

Is it worth your hard earned money? Are you playing it nonstop right out of the box? Or only with the patch? Are there any glaring AI weaknesses?

[Fritz]

Ok, you can play it out of the box, but it is much better patched. There are also "mods" out there that can improve play. As STK mentioned, the "Bolted" mod is very good. I am not playing with the mods.

AI weaknesses: yes, there are plenty (as with all war games). The big one I face is the enemy tends to mass his forces into super blocks. Figure out how to defeat a block and you can get over on the AI. There are some production oddities as well, like Siam building an Aircraft Carrier.

My big gripe with the game is the political system is not very interesting or nearly complex enough. For instance, military activity in South or Cental America would have certainly brought the US into some sort of conflict. This is not the case in HOI. Even annexation of Mexio does not seem to trigger a US intervention.

All in all, it is a fun game. I am happy to have spent the money on it. The game has replay value and a decent entertainment level, and that offsets the problems.

[Fritz]

dola,

looks like they put out another patch on 2/18.

[sachmo71]

Have you used the newest patch? Did they fix any of the political issues? That is part of the allure of the game for me, and so I hope they have improved it.

[Fritz]

From the patch readme it looks like they did a little tweaking on political AI, but nothing major.

I don't follow their borads, so I don't know if the political portion of the game gets much talk.

[daedalus]

Originally posted by Fritz
There are some production oddities as well, like Siam building an Aircraft Carrier.

Hey! It's possible, darn it! We're only biding our time!

[Uhhh, I don't even know if or how many we have NOW. Much less back then.]

[sachmo71]

Can you tell me a little about the combat? Is it abstract, like EUII, or is it a little more detailed?

[Fritz]

Combat is abstract like EU2 in the sense that once something is in combat it does its own thing. The combat system is more complex though. I will attempt to explain.

First you must understand combat relevant features of a unit. Each unit has 2 primary characteristics (I am using my terms here, not HOI terms): Strength and Organization. Strength relates to what % of 100% a unit is at in terms of manning. This is naturally 100 (at creation), though some of the units you start a game with may be under 100. You can get a unit up to 100 outside of combat by applying resources (manpower and supplies). Organization reflects things like internal communications, fatigue, alertness, and battle readiness. Your maximum organization level is determined by combat theories on the tech tree.

In combat both the strength and the organization come into play. A unit that reaches 0 strength will be eliminated. A unit that reaches 0 organization will retreat if it can, and if not it will be eliminated. Combat will result in losses to both strength and organization, but usually organization first.

[edit]Organization starts at 0 when a unit is created. If left alone and supplied it will go up on its own unti it reaches the maximum for that unit type. This is important because units freshly created have low organization and are not fit for combat. The same is true for units freshly from combat where their organization may be damaged.[/edit]


This strength/organization system is very important to the historic modeling of blitz tactics.

The system is further refined by a unit having combat values for soft (infantry), hard (armor), air attack, air defense, ground defense and such. (Ships and Aircraft have their own types) Each of these levels is controlled technologies researched and the units built. For infantry the guys you build in 1936 will evolve and be just as effective as the ones you build in 1947. This is not true of tank, air, or ships. These units combat values are largely tied to specific models. The units will either have to be upgraded/replaced or they may become obsolete.

[edit]Newer is not always better. If you research the armor tree all the way you should be able to build an ultra heavy 150mm gun tank. This tank will be slow, take a while to build, and consume more material. You may opt to build an advance light tank instead. As you full develop airpower you can get into jet and rocket planes. These planes have higher combat values, but their range is not so good. The moral is, even with progress you have tradeoffs.[/edit]

Combat is initiated by moving units into a province. The movement into a province is (or can be) controlled by a dialog box that lets you specify the time of arrival. By using this dialog with units from several locations you can phase and synchronize combat. This dialog also gives you some combat options like “feint” for a fake attack. The type of unit you are directing affects what options are available.

Another piece to combat is leadership. Each unit, or unit group, can have a leader. Leaders have a rating that they apply to combat (1-5). Leaders also have a rank, which determines how many units they can effectively control. The last thing a leader supplies is a modifier for special skills. For instance, Patton is a General with a skill of 5 and a specialty in panzers. This means he can effectively control 9 units with great skill and has some sort tank bonus.

The national forces in the game are created from a wide variety of “base” unit types, most of which only become available when certain technologies are researched. For armor, air, and ships the model further refines the base units.

Combat itself has many additional modifiers, like terrain type, weather, river crossings, etc.

All in all, I find the combat satisfying.

[edit] One thing I do not find all that satisfying is allied warfare. In single player mode there is almost no way to coordinate your actions with your allies. In a case like the Italian invasion of the Balkans the lack of coordination may be accuate, but the Allies were much sharper. Thus, the Allies can not replicate the multinational invasions or a unified front.[/edit]

[Fritz]

The "what you research" and "when you build" part is really the heart of the game.

Each nation must focus research in a few areas, and this completely affects national strategy.

Units take a while to build. Even base infantry are 3-4 months to construct and ships can take years. This requires some serious planning, and will probaly turn of the "click click click" RTS types.

If you build too soon your forces may be obsolete when war comes. If you build too late your forces may not be available. If you build too much it can rob your nation of the resources to research improvements and theories. Too little can leave you vulnerable to invasion.

You absolutely MUST be proactive in your plans because reaction takes far too long.

[sachmo71]

Ok, I'm buying. Based on everything I have seen, this game will probably keep me happy for years. Fritz, thanks for your insights. Without them, I would probably still be on the fence!! Now, are you going to restart your Japanese dynasty soon?

[Fritz]

The Japanse dynasty was not mine. I have started a few games with dynasty in mind, but stopping for writeups breaks the flow of the game.

After you get some play under your belt I would be open to try a MP game.

[sachmo71]

Oops. Yes, MP would be a hoot.

[sachmo71]

Dola!

bought the game, and I've been screwing around with it all weekend. I love it so far, even if there are some unrealistic results, such as Mexico going ape shit with Cavalry Corps! Anyway, the research model is top notch, but I'm still trying to figure out the industry capacity relationship...but that's what the Paradox Forums are for! Seriously, I knew about the documentation issue before I bought the game so I'm not upset about it at all, but it turns out to be quite an issue. The doc writer should be shot. However, everything you could ever need has already been covered on the Paradox Forum, and it's organized very well. I'll be heading over there soon.

If I had to rate the game on a 1 to 10 scale, so far I would give it a 7. Great fun, but I could see how those who were not forwarned about the learning curve could be upset with the game.

[Fritz]

what do you need to know about the IC?

[sachmo71]

Originally posted by Fritz
what do you need to know about the IC?

How it works, how the build industry button works, why it was going down...stuff like that.

[Fritz]

nutshell (I hope):

Each province yields a "production point" equal to its industrial capacity. So a 5 point province yields 5 points you can use to build units, conduct research, make supplies, or feed the people.

But each IC requires raw material to function. Not looking, but it is something like 1 coal, 1 steel, 1 rubber per day to make 1 IC work.

If you are short of rubber oil it can be converted at a cost. Say it is 3 to 1 (not sure about the ratio). If you are short of oil, coal can be converted at a cost. Say it is 3 to 1 (not sure about the ratio). This happens automatically. If you run short of any of the required materials your realized IC (production points) will fall short of your maximum possible IC.

You can (and should for most countries) research technologies to change the conversion ratio and make production more efficient.

When you build new industries the IC from the province that is building will be halved. For this reason it is not wise to increase the IC of provinces with over 4 or 5 (in the long game). For instance, if you increase the IC of a "10" province, it will be cut in half to 5 for a year. It will take you 5 years to recover the "lost" IC before the 1 extra point a year kicks in. If you start Jan 1 1936 it will be Jan 1 1942 before you start "making" more IC. if you want to maximize the output of a province over the course of a game you could push higher than 4 or 5, but you may need to make or find a chart to help keep track of things. I don't go for the max though as the opportunity costs from lost iC early may be devastating.

Did that answer your questions?

[sachmo71]

Yes, thanks a lot Fritz!

[wrigleyfield]

i have the game as well. not the greatest game ever but good. i hear the MODS make it even better. has anyone plyed mutli-player with it?

[Fritz]

sachmo and I keep talking about MP, but he has this thing about washing his hair.

[wrigleyfield]

whats with the MODS, i cant get them to work.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by wrigleyfield
whats with the MODS, i cant get them to work.

make sure you have the version that matches your patch level.

In general, you must patch first then add the mod. Also be very carefull to follow a mods instalation instructions.