Secret Master

Morvrann said: Hi, I never really played using Space Marines, wanna try it

Let me provide some guidance.

First, let's make something clear: Space marines are not about having good tanks. They are about having "meh" heavy tank destroyers that you can produce from 1937 until you you drown the enemy in them. So, when thinking about this, I don't want you looking at the tech tree and saying to yourself "Aha! I'll get 1943 heavy tanks soon. Let's swap to that!"

Resist that impulse. Instead think like this:

"I have 137% pr... Read more

HmJ_JP said: I often like these tactics, work well in HOI4 although AI gets suspicious when the opening is too narrow. But don't try the opposite in 1939 against Germany, it doesn't fare well until you're well equipped.

I did it by accident one time in an MP game many years ago.

The weird way some tiles near Kherson are drawn, one time I left one tile completely uncovered along the river. The Italian player sent some motorized troops through the gap, and I didn't notice at first. When I noticed a weird Italian snake heading towards Sevast... Read more

marcelo r. r. said: "Keep men, lose land; land can be taken again. Keep land, lose men; land and men are both lost"
View attachment 1013687

Needs an update for HOI4.

"Lose land, but keep stockpile. Land can be retaken. Lose land, but capitulate, both land and stockpile are lost."  

GrandVezir said: NFT preorder when?

When gas fees go down?  

LordWahu said: That is incredibly ominous and concerning

I wouldn't sweat it. They're probably just having teething issues with adding HOI4 to the blockchain. I'm guessing getting the CIC output to match up with the mining of crypto is a bit of an issue. And the staking of the generals and admirals as NFTs is time consuming.  

TheMoe said: Genius. I can declare war through the focus tree and pull my troops back until they spread out a little. Thanks!

That tactic is even more hilarious when used against the French and the Maginot. The French army will just abandon the Maginot and try to occupy Germany if you pull back from the border. No more fort bonuses for you, Gamelin.  

$ilent_$trider said: While we are discussing the subject of needless micro, why not add different classifications of munitions and force players to spend MILs on it???
PS: I am being facetious…

With all due apologies to John Lennon, but I have to do it for the lulz.


{ "lightbox_close": "Close", "lightbox_next": "Next", "lightbox_previous": "Previous", "lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try... Read more

marcelo r. r. said: Don't bother with DLC Switzerland before barbarrosa. finish soviet union first, then u will have spare troops, and medium tanks.
The DLC Switzerland have awful occupation debuff's, don't worth it before Soviet Union, it will become a sinkhole for your equipment.

Does Switzerland have all debuffs in place before September of 1939?  

I see a lot of good responses here, but I want to chime in with a few of my own.

him_15 said: Let’s say for Germany is it really worth to put resources into submarines.

That depends on what you mean by "put resources into submarines."

Germany starts with 1936 subs and a little guy named Donitz. Against the AI on normal, those two factors, plus Germany's starting dockyards (and the occupied ones in France/Benelux/Poland) are enough to give you a decent chance of neutralizing the British merchantmarine by June of 1941.

... Read more

I'm looking at testing something with aircraft, but I need a better testing method than what I have heretofore done before.

What I want to test is ground attack damage done versus the cost of planes lost to AA. Not planes lost to enemy aircraft, and not planes lost to accidents. Just planes lost to AA guns.

The problem I have whenever I test ground attack is that getting consistent data is difficult You need enough divisions in enough tiles to proc the CAS. But tactics and RNG can result in battles ending and not restarting. Getting the same number of hours in land combat with the same number of planes with enough total combats to create a decent sample is almost impossible.

There's also no way to auto-pause when combats end so you can restart them without time passing.

So, I need a better method for testing other than just randomly throwing divisions with low attack at each other and hoping for the best. I have som... Read more

Dimmie_Dumm said: It was just to keep bodies and souls together for some limited time

I agree, but this is too funny to leave alone.

{ "lightbox_close": "Close", "lightbox_next": "Next", "lightbox_previous": "Previous", "lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.", "lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow", "lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow", "lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen", "lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails", "lightbox_download": "Download", "ligh... Read more

My favorite tank doesn't exist in HOI4 anymore.

For a brief period right after the release of the tank designer, you could put rockets on regular tanks (not just SPART) and rocket launchers on tanks did not require tungsten. So, I'd spam T-34s with rocket launchers on them. Then I'd research rocket techs to boost firepower even further.

Yeah, it was probably a good idea for Paradox to nerf that strat. But it was still hilarious.  

SeekTruthFromFx said: These are reasonable suggestions. I am also frustrated sometimes by the low level of transport plane supply,

I'm not. I've seen what it looks like when transports have a lot more capacity.

HOI3 was famous for transport aircraft being a cost effective alternative to shipping supplies over land in some cases. Like, it cost more to move the supplies across X number of tiles than it did to move the same supplies by air.

I'd rather transports hauling less supply than their historical counterparts than being open to... Read more

icedlemon said: "According to the counter relationship of tactics cards, it can be found that the offensive tactics that can be countered are much more than the defensive tactics that can be countered , so taking the initiative is more beneficial to the defender."
Saw this sentence on wiki. I have also heard this point repeated elsewhere. It sounds like a such a weird logic to me. Shouldn't It be equally important between 'countering enemy tactic' and 'your own tactic not being countered'? Thus, initiative being equally important for attcker and defender?
Isn't It then reasonable to say that initiativ...

Read more

Alexander 'The Grape' said: Let's have a look shall we?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the Japanese tree was done before 35 day focuses were really a thing. This might factor into their awkwardness in the current state of the game.

To be honest, yes, I think a lot of those focuses should be 35 day focuses or reworked in other ways.

But...

...It does occur to me that in some cases, the focuses are kind of bad because to make them any better would make Japan OP from the historical angle. Japan really wanted to punch above its weigh... Read more

blahmaster6k said: I'm not completely sure but if I remember correctly the value is somewhere around 112 air attack worth of AA

That's roughly 4 line AA or 1 support AA and 3 line AA with Tier 2 AA and 1941 AA techs. You can cut that down to 3 line AA or 1 support AA and 2 line AA with max AA techs.

That's basically something like 15-20 aircraft worth of production cost per division if you convert the cost of the AA guns to aircraft cost. I was thinking that maybe you could immunize the entire front this way instead of just panzer formations,... Read more

You missed one indicator the game needs.

If the PARA divisions are in bad supply, they won't drop despite being given the order. You'll see the arrow in motion, but nothing happens. The game never tells you its because the PARA are in bad supply.

This often comes up when you try to PARA from an airfield with tons of planes on it besides the transports.  

FocusedHope said: So as I understand detection, it's not symmetric. If UK had radar and France didn't (have either radar or other sources of detection), then UK's fighters would shoot France's NAVs but France's NAVs wouldn't shoot back at UK's fighters.

Yeah, after rereading your post, I realized what you were actually saying. My bad for not paying attention. And yeah, plenty of RADAR on both sides of the Channel.

(For ship detection as much as plane detection. The first test I ran, I forgot to set up the RADAR. The fleets just kept sailing the Chan... Read more

vermicious knid said: Have you tried basing the two planes on land and recreating the experiment? I'm betting the land-based CV NAV fires the guns.

Yes. There's no problem from land. I'm specifically looking at carrier fights. The planes seem to behave normally when on manually selected missions whether from land or carrier. i.e. telling the CV NAVs to naval strike a sea zone  

FocusedHope said: Did France actually have 50% detection in the English Channel?

I made sure to put detection there.

But for the record, in naval combats with carriers, fighters shooting at each other get plenty of kills. And I want you to note that the Fulmars are getting kills against the CV NAVs. Combat is happening. It's not like the planes just can't see each other. It's just that the CV NAVs don't seem to fire their guns.