• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hearts of Iron IV

Sulaco

Sulaco

Diamond Member
Anybody playing this? It was officially released yesterday.

I've been with the series since the first game. Got deeply invested in HoI2 Armageddon and its expansions, and despite its initial somewhat overwhelming complexity, even HoI 3.
I spent countless hours trying to conquer the world as Japan (with limited success lol)

Being a Paradox game, I'm debating holding off til the first expansion or at least a few patches, but man, it looks tempting.
 
What do they change from release to release?

I tried playing one of the first ones, ditto for their Europa series.

Alas I must be a simpleton cause Civilization taps my brain power.
 
HoI4 is perfectly playable and complete right now, as it is. So was CK2 and EU4. Paradox's DLCs add new features to the games, and they're entirely optional. You can buy today CK2 or EU4 without any DLCs and enjoy the games for hundreds of hours, just like I did when I bought them years ago.
 
Me since I have already sunk 700+ hours into EU4. Just started the tutorial and carried playing with Italy.........I crushed Abyssinia and Yugoslavia in one year and sent some regiments to fight in the Spanish civil war.

There's a very steep learning curve when it comes to Paradox games but once you've got the basics figured out you begin to understand why everything is so frustrating in the beginning.

Steam is a rip-off as usual for new releases so if your going to buy it I recommend you look for a legit steam key elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
I'm really torn about this one. There aren't really any other games to take it's place, but I really don't like the direction they took. I know I'm strange, in that I liked some of the micro-intensive features of 3. OOB for example, which has been removed for 4.

I guess I'm getting the strong impression that I started to get with one of the updates for EU4, with colonial nations (and yes I know you could easily mod that out, but the game was balanced with them in mind). The devs seem to be designing the new games with multiplayer in mind. Now that's not a bad thing, but it does conflict with people who like to micromanage things and prefer in depth game mechanics. This wasn't much of an issue with EU4, but HOI is an entirely different sort of game. You don't need to micro your armies in EU like you would for Barbarossa, for example. It's not an issue for sp, you can pause and take what time you need. The solution for mp is to have a way for the ai to do the micro.

It wouldn't be a problem for me if it was an option to use the ai, but here it appears to be the way you are supposed to play. And the last thing I want to do in my free time is baby sit some incompetent ai's. I wouldn't play a game of EU4 as England and let the ai shape the new world, I want to do so myself. That's the enjoyment I get out of playing England in EU. I really wouldn't play a grand strategy ww2 game to let the ai manage my armies. From what videos I've watched, it's as though you grab some units, click a front, and watch a blob of one color eat another. Yes I know it's not that simple, but one thing that's worse than too much micro is having to micro manage ai's, for me at least.

For anyone looking for a ww2 grand strategy game, and who doesn't want to have to manage every detail, this may be the game for you. For people like me, probably not so much. I'll still buy it, likely even today because I'm stuck at home unable to get to work because of flooding, and because I will hope that patches/expansions/mods make it better.
 
BxgJ said:
I'm really torn about this one. There aren't really any other games to take it's place, but I really don't like the direction they took. I know I'm strange, in that I liked some of the micro-intensive features of 3. OOB for example, which has been removed for 4.

I guess I'm getting the strong impression that I started to get with one of the updates for EU4, with colonial nations (and yes I know you could easily mod that out, but the game was balanced with them in mind). The devs seem to be designing the new games with multiplayer in mind. Now that's not a bad thing, but it does conflict with people who like to micromanage things and prefer in depth game mechanics. This wasn't much of an issue with EU4, but HOI is an entirely different sort of game. You don't need to micro your armies in EU like you would for Barbarossa, for example. It's not an issue for sp, you can pause and take what time you need. The solution for mp is to have a way for the ai to do the micro.

It wouldn't be a problem for me if it was an option to use the ai, but here it appears to be the way you are supposed to play. And the last thing I want to do in my free time is baby sit some incompetent ai's. I wouldn't play a game of EU4 as England and let the ai shape the new world, I want to do so myself. That's the enjoyment I get out of playing England in EU. I really wouldn't play a grand strategy ww2 game to let the ai manage my armies. From what videos I've watched, it's as though you grab some units, click a front, and watch a blob of one color eat another. Yes I know it's not that simple, but one thing that's worse than too much micro is having to micro manage ai's, for me at least.

For anyone looking for a ww2 grand strategy game, and who doesn't want to have to manage every detail, this may be the game for you. For people like me, probably not so much. I'll still buy it, likely even today because I'm stuck at home unable to get to work because of flooding, and because I will hope that patches/expansions/mods make it better.
Click to expand...

I didn't get to play much HoI3, but wasn't AI a huge part of it also? Every single system and your armies could be individually AI controlled. AI control seems like a bigger part of the HoI series than the other grand strategies.

Anyway, I think it's a great game. I played well into last night as France. I lost to the blitz but lived to fight another day with a decent army in Africa. As with all Paradox games, it needs a couple patches and expansions to become exceptional.
 
Took me awhile to get decent at EU4. This game looks more complex and Micro-Managey, which doesn't appeal to me right now.
 
Bryf50 said:
I didn't get to play much HoI3, but wasn't AI a huge part of it also? Every single system and your armies could be individually AI controlled. AI control seems like a bigger part of the HoI series than the other grand strategies.

Anyway, I think it's a great game. I played well into last night as France. I lost to the blitz but lived to fight another day with a decent army in Africa. As with all Paradox games, it needs a couple patches and expansions to become exceptional.
Click to expand...

It was an option. You could micro it or give the ai some directions and let it go. That's fine, but some decisions they made make it much harder to micro if that's your choice. For example, battle over/unit arrived type of alerts aren't implemented. I know message spam can be bad, but it was customizable. The ability to pause after battles or unit arrivals was very helpful if you wanted to control things.

I went ahead and bought the game, haven't played too much but there certainly improvements over the last one. Whether the improvements make it better given the features they removed remains to be seen.
 
I got it since I am a Paradox junkie. Over 600 hours in HOI 3 and almost 20 hours in 4 so far. I am lost with 4. I know the core concepts and I know how it is supposed to work but this one triggers some kind of failure in my head to play it right. I have been stomped every game so far.

First, I love the production system. Building each individual item, stockpiling hardware and the upgrade system are fantastic. But no matter what I do I am out produced 10 to one. I cannot seem to wrap my head around how to get enough tanks to build a single division by 1939 as well as build any infantry.

In my last Germany game I made it to 1941 before being overwhelmed. Even managed to take France in a separate war which completely knocked it out of the game. Italy was able to take all of Africa, I had all of Europe. But apparently the 140 divisions I was able to build were nothing compared to the 800+ the Soviets had when they invaded. I had to stick 50 divisions all over the coast just to stop the constant invasions from the UK and Canada leaving about 90 divisions to hold Russia, I lost.

Another part I cannot get right is the fronts. I miss the theaters from HOI3, they were easy. Stick units in theater, turn on AI, win. Now it is create a front, create an offensive, launch offensive, some enemy unit gets around offensive and encircles whole line. Then by the time I notice I am encircled I have to pull forces from another theater to break the encirclement. I will get it, eventually.

I finally figured out how to control the air war last night and am working on the naval side now. It is really nice once you get it, much better than the convoluted systems of previous games.

Overall for now I think the consensus is that newcomers to the series are mostly happy while the long time players are the most upset. So if you are interested now is the time to jump on board before expansions start dropping that increase the complexity.
 
I've looked occasionally at the Hearts of Iron games when browsing Steam and noticed that Hearts of Iron IV was coming out. They look kinda cool. I'm not a huge strategy game guy but I loved Command and Conquer and Age of Empires II back in the day, and these days once in a while will play a game of Company of Heroes 2 (or Wargame Airland Battle/Red Dragon but I get horribly raped in that). I know those aren't nearly as complex as this game appears to be but I do have an interest in strategy games (and history in general). I've also played a bit of Civilization IV and Beyond Earth but honestly I'm kinda lost in those games; I don't really have a grand strategy when playing. But I don't have much playtime in those games.

Do you guys think Hearts of Iron IV would be worth $40 for me, someone who's never played the series but has a strategy game interest?
 
Best part about 4 being released, can now look to picking up last of 3 for cheap and get into it while waiting for the last of 4 to be published 😀
 
clamum said:
I've looked occasionally at the Hearts of Iron games when browsing Steam and noticed that Hearts of Iron IV was coming out. They look kinda cool. I'm not a huge strategy game guy but I loved Command and Conquer and Age of Empires II back in the day, and these days once in a while will play a game of Company of Heroes 2 (or Wargame Airland Battle/Red Dragon but I get horribly raped in that). I know those aren't nearly as complex as this game appears to be but I do have an interest in strategy games (and history in general). I've also played a bit of Civilization IV and Beyond Earth but honestly I'm kinda lost in those games; I don't really have a grand strategy when playing. But I don't have much playtime in those games.

Do you guys think Hearts of Iron IV would be worth $40 for me, someone who's never played the series but has a strategy game interest?
Click to expand...

If you are lost in Civilization then i'd stay away from Heart of Iron
 
lupi said:
Best part about 4 being released, can now look to picking up last of 3 for cheap and get into it while waiting for the last of 4 to be published 😀
Click to expand...


you didnt get the entire 3 series during the humble sale? it was like $5
 
clamum said:
I've looked occasionally at the Hearts of Iron games when browsing Steam and noticed that Hearts of Iron IV was coming out. They look kinda cool. I'm not a huge strategy game guy but I loved Command and Conquer and Age of Empires II back in the day, and these days once in a while will play a game of Company of Heroes 2 (or Wargame Airland Battle/Red Dragon but I get horribly raped in that). I know those aren't nearly as complex as this game appears to be but I do have an interest in strategy games (and history in general). I've also played a bit of Civilization IV and Beyond Earth but honestly I'm kinda lost in those games; I don't really have a grand strategy when playing. But I don't have much playtime in those games.

Do you guys think Hearts of Iron IV would be worth $40 for me, someone who's never played the series but has a strategy game interest?
Click to expand...

Hearts of Iron has about as much in common with old RTS games like AoE and C&C as War and Peace has with the Twilight Saga. They're both books....and that's about it.
C&C/AoE and HoI are both "strategy games" by some definition, but that's about where the similarities end.
I would be very hesitant to recommend the HoI games to someone not familiar or comfortable with other Paradox strategy games, at least for a general sense of scope and realism, as well as basic overarching gameplay mechanic.
That, and a history buff. Someone who really enjoys the operational minutiae of World War II, or who fancies themselves a sort of armchair general who likes trying different approaches to (in)famous historical battles and plans.

It's definitely not a pick up and play and throw tanks against other tanks kind of strategy game, the same way Europa Universalis is not a pick up and play and throw soldiers against other soldiers kind of strategy game. It's some of the steepest learning curve in a modern strategy game, but it's certainly not insurmountable if you've got an interest in the time period. And by all accounts the fourth game is where you want to start as its significantly streamlined over the old titles.
 
sandorski said:
Took me awhile to get decent at EU4. This game looks more complex and Micro-Managey, which doesn't appeal to me right now.
Click to expand...

More complex than EU4 with all DLC and updates? I'd say your wrong, granted I've only played HOI4 for about 5 hours so far.

The trade and diplomacy aspects in EU are complex enough to be a game itself really.
 
Last edited:
Sulaco said:
Hearts of Iron has about as much in common with old RTS games like AoE and C&C as War and Peace has with the Twilight Saga. They're both books....and that's about it.
C&C/AoE and HoI are both "strategy games" by some definition, but that's about where the similarities end.
I would be very hesitant to recommend the HoI games to someone not familiar or comfortable with other Paradox strategy games, at least for a general sense of scope and realism, as well as basic overarching gameplay mechanic.
That, and a history buff. Someone who really enjoys the operational minutiae of World War II, or who fancies themselves a sort of armchair general who likes trying different approaches to (in)famous historical battles and plans.

It's definitely not a pick up and play and throw tanks against other tanks kind of strategy game, the same way Europa Universalis is not a pick up and play and throw soldiers against other soldiers kind of strategy game. It's some of the steepest learning curve in a modern strategy game, but it's certainly not insurmountable if you've got an interest in the time period. And by all accounts the fourth game is where you want to start as its significantly streamlined over the old titles.
Click to expand...

Yeah I didn't think they shared much in common, I guess. I do love reading history, especially military history.

I guess I was just hoping it wasn't ridiculous to learn. I mean, if there's no manual to the thing then I don't really have hope. Well, if there's enough YouTube tutorial-type videos then I'd probably be ok.
 
I've been playing some, first as Germany building right up to war, after that I played some hands-off games to watch the ai (playing as a small country in south america and toggling fow). It's been... a mixed bag. I won't go into everything, just some of the stuff that stands out.

First the good -

Industry and trade - I like the way industry and trade are managed. It's easy to see what you have and what you need. Any resource shortage triggers a notification.

Division designer - You can really personalize your divisions, making huge ones or small garrison divisions. There are templates but you can do what you want (given you have the land experience to change them).

battleplan system - You can just use it if you want, and the ai seems competent enough at filling out a front at least. So if you don't want too much micro you can give the ai some direction and it will do ok (this is for a defined front only, more on that in a bit). The general opinion so far seems to be that the best compromise between battleplan/ai and full micro is to just manually control the breakthrough force, and let the ai manage the mass of the infantry.

AI - Well, it certainly does perform naval invasions, as opposed to the last game where there were few.

Supply - Well it's certainly simpler than the last game.

Now for the bad....

AI part 1 - It performs too many naval invasions. As in, way way too many. Some examples from my current hands off game - When Germany declared war on the Netherlands they decided the best way to stop the German horde of soldiers was to take a good portion of their army and invade a few provinces up the coast. It didn't end well. After France fell the UK had at one point 3 different landings along the German controlled coast, along with one in Italy that had been going on for over a year. The UK lost many divisions in these landings. Germany was not yet at war with the Soviets, so it was probably unwise to spam landings. Oh, and South Africa decided to land a force in the German homeland, by themselves. So basically it seems that the ai cannot evaluate the odds of success after the initial landings, even against overwhelming odds. Thus they can end up wasting their army on them.

No beaches - So yes if you don't want them to establish a beachhead you have to garrison nearly every coastal province. Though they do need to get to a port for resupply.

battleplan system - Given the above you would think there would be a way to let the ai manage the coast right? Nope. You can't set a coast as a front. One work around is to draw a fallback line along the coast, but the ai won't respond if it's breached, at least from what I've seen. Garrison doesn't seem to the job either. This is one place I really miss notifications.

Historical start? - Well it isn't nearly as historical as you might want. My current hands off game had Germany decide to flank the maginot line by going through Switzerland.... There have been some really weird results I've read about on the forums, though at least some of them appear to be primarily the result of the sometimes brain dead ai.

AI part 2 - A few things. Why does the ai fight over the Sahara? The response to naval invasions isn't consistent. Germany seems to consistently beat them back, while I saw Italy almost ignore a large UK landing north of Rome as most of their army continued to try and push into southern France. They eventually dealt with it, but that may be because the UK got distracted with other invasions into Germany. And fighting over the Sahara.

Germany seems to have trouble at times with Denmark. There have been some screens of Germany having over 100 divs just parked there, either unable to conquer the last of the provinces of Denmark, or across the strait into Sweden if at war with them.

Free military access if you have a common enemy, no permission required - Now this is one thing that just baffles me. If you and another country end up at war with the same enemy, they can just march troops all over your territory, and you can't stop them. Unless you go to war with them, that is. For examples of this I would suggest reading the forums, but here's one. Say that you are Germany, and at war with the allies but not with the Soviets yet. By some weirdness the Soviets end up at war with the allies. Now you will likely have Soviet troops all over Germany, defending your coast, and going to any front you have with the allies. Something like this can happen with any set of allies or enemies. I would like to know how this got through testing, though the cynic in me would say they likely spent all their time playing multiplayer :\

Now there will be patches, the ai will improve, and I would bet that the mil access issue will be changed. So I still wouldn't say don't buy it, but it wouldn't hurt to wait a bit, at least for information on patches. If you do want it now at least do some reading and watching videos.

Also if you do play it, save frequently. You may want to load from a save if any ai craziness occurs. It's not fun to play as the US, for example, and spend all that time building up, only for something weird to happen giving you little to do with your forces.
 
Here's an example of game-breaking ai.

D94ue60.jpg


The island west of Copenhagen has 2 provinces, the north one being the one with over 100 axis divisions on it. They have been there for over 2 years in game as of this pic. They try to cross but are unable to do so, probably because of all the fleets around. So the axis leave all of these forces here, and as a result there has been no invasion of the Soviet Union, who got bored I guess and invaded Iran and Iraq.

Something that's just as bad is the allies have invaded the southern province on that island over and over. They can only land 10 divs, those can't beat the 100+ on the other prov, and they get wiped over and over. Nations such as the UK and Japan are running out of divisions due to all of these invasions they can't support.

edit - Japan isn't invading here, they lost all their men in China doing roughly the same thing.
 
I think I encountered something similar. One of my armies got locked at the tip of Italy. The AI was just repeatedly attacking, losing, and attacking again from Sicily so that it could never withdraw. I had to land troops on the other end of Sicily to stop it.
 
sandorski said:
Watch some Youtube for good tips. Quill18 and Arumba are pretty good at these types of games.
Click to expand...

Probably worth checking Shenrryr2 out if you can stand his commentary, he seems to be one of the few large Youtubers who explain their overall strategy along with the moment to moment decisions. DDRJake certainly gets an honorable mention too.

Note: this opinion is based on EU4 and not HoI4 as I have little interest in the "mad dash" of HoI4 and much prefer the "slow burn" of EU4. Although I assume that won't effect the way their videos are presented.
 
BxgJ said:
Here's an example of game-breaking ai.

D94ue60.jpg


The island west of Copenhagen has 2 provinces, the north one being the one with over 100 axis divisions on it. They have been there for over 2 years in game as of this pic. They try to cross but are unable to do so, probably because of all the fleets around. So the axis leave all of these forces here, and as a result there has been no invasion of the Soviet Union, who got bored I guess and invaded Iran and Iraq.

Something that's just as bad is the allies have invaded the southern province on that island over and over. They can only land 10 divs, those can't beat the 100+ on the other prov, and they get wiped over and over. Nations such as the UK and Japan are running out of divisions due to all of these invasions they can't support.

edit - Japan isn't invading here, they lost all their men in China doing roughly the same thing.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this post.

This is EXACTLY why I seldom trust ambitious grand strategy games (especially from Paradox) out of the gate, or even the folks who play them early and report "no problems".
People too frequently think of "buggy" in terms of crashes and technical bugs. And of course those are serious too.

But in games like this, few things are more devastating to a play through than getting really deep into a campaign, and then finding out the AI is desperately crippled and can't compensate for some tiny little thing, basically turning the game into a joke.

I'd almost rather face technical issues and crashes out of the gate then myriad of AI problems. It's just so demoralizing getting dozens hours into a game like this, only to find out that, oh hey, guess what, the AI can't deal with my basic invasion strategy or launch a competent invasion themselves.

I expected this kind of thing, but combined with the fact that there are without question going to be a ton of DLC and expansions in the near future, I think I will be holding off for a little bit on this one, much as I love the series.
Same with Stellaris.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top