TOP 10 Upcoming Features in HOI4!

[@elolawynladriel]

If they add infantry equipment designer, they can turn equipment modules into the equipment needed to "design" special forces infrantry units. They will be balanced by "weight", production cost or supply use. Equipment conversion cost could mean the time/cost needed to turn standard infrantry into special forces.

[@Savantqqqq]

Surely they add it with dlc

[@hatimzeineddine8723]

Please no

[@johngalt5166]

Hot take I think that there is other more important work the game needs before they start adding more designers….

[@xxxgamestearxxx337]

there is a mod where you can design infantry equipment, arty, AA and anti tank

[@GerinoMorn]

Also training time! E.g. some "modules" could cause an infantry division using this equipment template to train slower (as it might be more complicated than point+shoot)

[@mitchellb9223]

I would prefer new features to the game that are not just more technology designers. I want more fleshed out diplomacy, politics and intelligence agencies.

[@pvp216]

and economy

[@johngalt5166]

I agree 100%

[@NoFlu]

The problem is that HoI is a wargame. Yea, you are fighting wars in other PDX games as well, but its the main focus of HoI, going too much into economy and society would take away from the main point. Not trying to shit on EU/Vic players, but those games have a different focus which you can't properly portray in a ~10 year timespan. Heck, turning a country completly fascist withing a year, like you can do as the UK, is pretty unrealistic, but HoI doesn't have time to properly do politics and statecrafting....

[@TK-1103]

@@NoFlu this

[@Justplaying478]

That would be great and would lay the groundwork for the cold war in the game

[@thomascalderbank6098]

I'd like to see a future where as a minor power you can contact shipyards in bigger nations to build ships for you. But, if that major when to war they could have the option to take the ship

[@elolawynladriel]

They might as well just use the same tank designer as a generic designer for eveything. They just have to create modules for every part of every vehicle and establish rules about what you can mix and match.

[@elolawynladriel]

Actually that designer could be use for more things than design equipment. You could use it to design goverment types and modules are laws.

[@nmpolo]

@@elolawynladriel I can't wait to design a 0% reliability government.

[@kusturucu1015]

@@nmpolo here comes the 72.9 piercing government!

[@footisman2059]

@@nmpolo Ah yes, the british royal marriage focus.

[@masonwernes103]

true, i should be able to select wheels and have an armored car designer, also it wasnt uncommon for half tracks to have howitzers or anti air guns mounted to them aswell...

[@redhairdavid]

A fall back line that gave you a pre dug in position would be great. Like you have a front like, then back at a river, a fall back line, and when you got there, you would get full dig in bonus the instant you arrive as civilians dug it while you were fighing

[@backfirebaldich5906]

It could be better to do a fort rework, because in their current state they are boring

[@redhairdavid]

@@backfirebaldich5906 maybe both :p I haven't thought of forts as boring before. Care to elaborate? What would you look for in a fort system?

[@backfirebaldich5906]

@@redhairdavid There is not much interaction or realism. For interactiveness, you just press a button and it gives a defense bonus right now. It would be more interesting if you got to actually design fort systems that are cheaper (like trenches) or ones that are more complex (like the atlantic wall or maginot). You could also have a new fort busting special forces, like combat engineers. For realism, it makes no sense that all forts work both ways. Along with that, in real life forts like the maginot were huge obstacles that the germans had to go around. In hoi, you can just bomb them and go through, which is not very realistic. Basically, I would like forts to point one way usually, and some sort of "fort design" system. Your idea is great too. I would like both in conjunction.

[@redhairdavid]

@@backfirebaldich5906 I also like your ideas here. That would be pretty cool

[@prius_power]

@@backfirebaldich5906I feel like you can make it similar to how railways currently work where you can lay down railways to specific areas and upgrade that specific track. I think having a system where you can draw a fort line in the supply map mode, chose what level it is and have it build in sections like railways do would work very well.

[@Baconsandwich47]

I think for the special forces, the amount shouldn't be limited by a reduced usefulness depending on increasing numbers, but more close to real life, where the reason is cost. They take a long time to train, have expensive equipment, and therefore their numbers are low. Also, if they are expensive and take very long to train and replenish, you'd think twice where to deploy them, also closer to reality, but at the same time works as a game mechanic, imo.

[@anon3988]

Would just make majors stomp minors even more than they already do. Imo special forces should work like intelligence agencies; behind-enemy-lines missions to achieve logistical strikes etc, gives an edge to players who put the time in

[@MrMaro1995]

Maybe special Forces should have heavily reduced XP gain, because ops guys already know a lot, and are highly proficient in combat so theres much less for them to learn, but replenishing with conscripts would cause a massive hit to their combat xp and effectiveness. As I think of it now maybe the paradox should add some kind of reserves mechanic, where you can store manpower with some xp outside of the field.

[@gsuth20202]

If you wanted realism special forces would prob need to pool their manpower from only experienced units in the field and require more expensive armaments and a conversion period where they undergo training and refitting

[@robkurtzman7113]

The Mech / Car / Truck designer would work like the aircraft designer. When you add a certain module, it locks the design as CAS, Fighter or Naval. Analogous trigger modules would force designs to Truck, Mech or Armoured Car categories

[@alicebrown6215]

Cargo Space and Infantry Compartment for truck or mechanized are easy enough, though can't think of the AC unique module

[@nathanhelfinstine4922]

@@alicebrown6215 Just have any light tank built on wheeled suspension be designated an armored car.

[@monophthalmos9633]

- Trade laws could get some tweaks - Advisors that boost non-aligned - Foci that spawn ships - Historical special divisions with limited availability like the French Foreign Legion

[@mikkel066h]

Think the Special forces should have less penalty for being behind enemy lines. Have some of them be able to do operations with the agency, so when you have a war break out you have a division(one that you already have build and placed) be able to start in an enemy controlled area. Or block a supply line or hub from being used. Which is what the Germans did with their brandenburgers when they invaded the USSR.

[@Rchannelfull]

I think they need to put mechanized and armored car into a tank designer. They would just have a "infantry compartment" additional module that would automatically turn it into a mechanized. So you can have those unholy cursed designs or extremely expensive tank/IFV designs like Merkava or something. Or maybe you can change the type yourself like with flame tank thingy.

[@melfice999]

There already is a way to more or less a way to design AC/MOT/Mech themed "tanks". with various suspensions as is. it almost feels like the game at one point had an intention of making Tank Designer a "Vehicle designer" but it was cut at development.

[@miguelgameiro8063]

If I’m not mistaken a cheap 1938 chassis is still cheaper than the cheapest mechanized so until that changes I’m not interested

[@psychzach1588]

Agreed. I desperately want to build armored cars and armed mech and mech divisions.

[@oliwierbroda2575]

​@@miguelgameiro8063 yes but it has worse org and overall stats.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

Miguel gameiro obviously adding a troop compartment would increase costs. Simple as. You could also have multiple sized compartments. Larger compartments increase costs, reduce reliability and reduce breakthrough but you require fewer vehicles per mech inf battalion.

[@RomanianGordonFreeman]

17:15 Say my name , Heisenberg You god damn right

[@anthonysantilo928]

I actually love the doctrine trees of a mod I used to play (I think it was world ablaze) where it essentially separated doctrines into infantry, tank, and artillery doctrine and gave a lot more customization to how your army worked.

[@Niveksirrah13]

Adding more defense options like mines and wire that kinda act like CAS damage to tanks and infantry that attack into and break through your lines would really help nations on the back foot and punish the speedy units a lot. Also adding in mine sweepers and such. Giving engineers something to do on the attack. A neat thing for a fallback line could also be prebuilt fortification so if you get pushed to them you can get some entrenchment. Not a bonus but more like a higher base line like starting at 50% or something to help slow them down. Would encourage people to make forts and such too. Defensive gear like mines and stuff could be handy for an infantry rework. Like inatead of just infantry would could have light and heavy. Sappers, demo teams and such both as main line and attached. Lots they could do with that to make having different divisions instead making the same ol line infantry en mass.

[@lordDenis16]

I think that if army expansion was connected to overall war support within a country that would make more sense. It works for the mobilisation laws but I think it could also work for division numbers 🤔

[@Swagmaster07]

Artillery designer can just be called cannon designer, where you can design AA, AT, and artillery so it would make more sense instead of just artillery having a designer.

[@thearisen7301]

Pure track should be an option for the mechanized to make things like Kangaroos & Universal Carriers. A rocket designer could allow for things like building cheaper rockets that can be intercepted or more expensive ones that are nearly impossible to intercept. Also naval launched like the RL Regulus missile.

[@kayaphus4303]

Regarding the Mech Designer: Someone has started making a mod for this and it works very well on paper out. Combines trucks, cars and halftracks. 1936 - Interwar car chassis, Interwar truck chassis 1938 - early car chassis, early truck chassis 1940 - improved car chassis, improved truck chassis 1942 - advance car chassis, advance truck chassis 1944 - modern car chassis, modern truck chassis Like the tank designer, newer chassis allows for more weight, more power and more reliability. Inspired by real life military wheeled vehicles which themselves were based on civilian counterparts. A halftrack is just an armored truck. A heavy armored car is an armored truck with a canon. This is VERY possible already.

[@SanderDoesThings]

After playing around with the Infantry+Artillery Designer mod, I think an artillery designer is very much underrated with how low Dave put it on the list, it works well with the infantry designer in how it can improve infantry customization

[@TheMjollnir67]

I'm playing with that mod, too. Did you notice that you can add armor to the trains and even (although that might come via the ship designer mod) can modify your transport/convoys with weapons and other stuff?

[@doktertjiftjaf5186]

Here are some ideas for officers. Just like with divisional commander's, have the same mechanic for your navy where a captain of a ship can earn XP and get promoted to the rank of admiral. And introduce traits that give bonuses to your air force and also give the ability to appoint new chiefs of the air force.

[@unowno123]

I think they should customise division designer, meaning infantry gets replaced with "riflemen" or "lmg gunners", "field hospitals" or "landmines" etc. But not an infantry equipment customiser. Imagine adding support landmines to your paratroopers for better defense

[@gmodrules123456789]

For the artillery designer, you could have barrel length, caliber, and shell weight as possible customization options, within certain constraints of course.

[@TheVascar]

Another thing for the wonder weapon rework is some of the alt history wonder weapons that were thought of and researched on both sides during this time period. Pigeon bombs, Death Ray(that later turned into radar), colossus sized tanks (Ratte and Monster), Sonnengewehr(Orbital sun powered death ray), and Rocket U-boat. Also include some of the early(1950's) cold war weapons like Atomic Annie (M65 atomic cannon)

[@urknall2010]

It should be a special resarch divison and also include radar technology.

[@PaulisInclusion]

I really want a special forces revamp too. I wish they were worth using because the concept is cool.

[@MEL0N1007]

22:42 Not only that every nation needs to have more than one focus tree for how the war played out. There should be a historical cold war focus tree if allies win the war, there should be TNO scenario focus tree in case Axis win the war, there needs to be TWR scenario focus tree in case Japan loses but Germany wins, etc... It would be really cool to see it but it's highly unlikely... Personally, I really want to see it tho

[@RonMalright]

I think PDX should reword fortresses. You should be able to dismantle them. Sometimes it annoys me that the AI builds defenses in the middle of nowhere and when I set my divisions' to defend an area including fortresses the divisions will be stationed in these spots where I don't want them. Another feature it could be added is to set a direction of defense. That's how fortresses are supposed to work. You should choose a direction of defense. Let's say East. That would give you a bonus for attacks from Noth and south as well, but not if you are attacked from the form west.

[@wilberdebeer4696]

Or have forts work from every angle but add trenches where they are cheaper than forts, don't protect as much and have a directional penalty.

[@phreakedout1]

A Special Forces Rework should include integrations to Agency/Agent activities. Obviously it'd also be helpful for the reasons you mentioned but also expand on supporting resistance operations, etc.

[@schellwalabyen4656]

I think there should be a way to highly focus on special forces. Like for example as america or britain having almost no regular army and just a marine core, to use in minor conflicts around the world. In a way making the special forces cap independent from the army and also more dependent of the branch it originates from air force/ navy.

[@Jdubya4040]

I like the idea of the mechanized designer because the tank customization already decently already implements this they just need the option to classify the halftrack built vehicles as mechanized/armored cars

[@keinenbockmehr1749]

I would add a general "Vehicle" Creator. There you can decide if you want something armored/unarmored, if it needs tracks, has a gun or not. If it is used to transport troops or supplies. WHAT supplies it transports (fuel or general supplies to raise the stored amount or lower the consumption) If it is used to carry replacement equipment (to raise reliability or give a % discount on replacement gear taken from the stockpile) etc. You know? Let us custom design the support companies that aren't AA/AT/Arty, so we can give every template exactly what it needs most in exchange for having to actually design and produce every support design. You have a fully armored division? Well they can have trucks with additional fuel drums for example. The division that stays home most of the time can do with more engineers and less supply because they sit at the source and would be better of with faster entrenchment instead. Assault? Well, what about a design with more armor and a bigger gun in exchange for more trucks per unit (because they have less space for soldiers per truck)... Instead of using premade support companies that get better with all the research, give us a dedicated support-research-tab that unlocks more and better ways of customizing every type of ground vehicle we need.

[@giahungnguyen6334]

Special force can apply limit to training slot, like you can spam train hundred divisions but can only train 2, 3 SF division at one time

[@schnipelchwanz83]

I like your idea of the special forces stats getting more and more average the more you expand them, since inevitably they and some point stop beeing the "best of the best" What I also think would be a really cool mechanic for balancing out special forces would be to give your Infantry a corresponding debuff. A bit along the lines of "those best of the best" are now no longer in your regular army, so they can't make up for the soldiers that are of below average that end up having to serve too". And then a cool focus might be to recruit people into your special forces which aren't fit for regular military service, your Bankrobbers, Daredevils etc., which would somewhat be historically accurate looking at the early Recruitment for the SAS

[@RoverStorm]

The only way I see artillery designing working is if you can customize ammunition, so then you have to balance "I need a stronger gun for beefier shells, but the production cost for both is higher. France had a huge stockpile of smaller shells I stole from the blitzkrieg, maybe I produce a more effective smaller gun than what France had since we already have the shells. Or maybe I go for resource expensive but potent light shells for a smaller gun that can fit onto a truck." Of course this opens the can of worms for ammunition for...everything...

[@blackfire8008]

For special forces: Why don't implement a mechanic, that for every battalion you choose a set of trainings(like a battalion designer) and in base of how many you add, will shorten the training time or make it longer. Every training gives a set of bonuses, like: training in the mountain = mountain attack or defense. If you excede a number of trainings, the battalion becomes a special force, that will make eexponentially longer the training time, so you can choose to have an all special forces army, but it will take 3 times longer to train, and for every lost soldier of that battalion will lower the division experience three times more(it scales with training time). Another thing that could be added, it's thet the experience level will determine how big the modifiers will be, but the veteran level of experience(and the one before, which i don't remember the name) would not increase the modifiers, but add the bonuses, that the current experience mecchanic gives.

[@robinmatten]

Idea for wonderwapons: For example the Ratte or the Landcruiser the Germans planned to built: If your fully researched and designed it you get the opportunity to select a max military factory region and than there are used to build it. so the enemy could spot (higher chance with spies or decryption) the constructionside and bomb it so the bulding process would be slow down or could be set back a little and in the and a superstrong unit spawns but it can*t move over mountains. To move over the ocean you hvae to desemble and assemble (need region with lvl. 5 shipyards or harbors) it. And you have to reproduce sunken parts. For example

[@Krom5072]

Well there is a reason they didn't build it. It would be big and slow, so, you know, a great target for artillery and CAS.

[@theworldsthreat]

Well, well, well… wouldn’t you know it?

[@robinmatten]

​@@theworldsthreat well what can I say? I'm hyped for the new dlc

[@DuduDruidDotCom]

Wunderwaffle thing should be its own thing, its own tab, that opens up "Wunderwaffe" projects, there you have to spend your mil/civ factories, as well as certain amount of resources to research and develop these. They could be long-lasting projects that might produce something powerful, or something useless or impractical (i.e Jet Engine/Nukes for powerful/useful and something like Ratte/Superheavy Tanks for less useful)

[@marcocorrente2115]

I think frontlines could be linked to fallback lines but assigned as reserve, not counting towards a General's cap. As battle went on, and units lost org, they would fall back to the fallback line (getting assigned to it) and unit(s) (aprox combat width) would reinforce the frontline. My thoughts here stem from a MP game of GER vs RUS where I (RUS) experienced an incredibly difficult to manage frontline, when slowly loosing ground to enemy focused (armored) spearheads. Most of the border was manned by a 'homogeneous' field marshall frontline, so unit fallback sometimes started on the balkans and ended in the baltics. Important states (urban, depots, railways, river-crossings) had to be individually reinforced with separate armies. And after many 'oh-shits' during the 5 year war, the front lines were completely messed, to the point where I could no longer understand what and who went where. The 5+ unit icons on each title also didn't make it easy.

[@tidusffx1147]

Artillery could be done several ways Mobility - static(sntrenchment), wheeled(speed),rail(stuck to rail lines but faster maybe?) Gun - light(soft attack), medium (split ussage) heavy (hard attack) multi role (gives some aa via shrapnel maybe or airburst round) Set up - entrenchment vs mobility Ammunition ×2 the supply of shells types on hand boost damage types and such Weight reliability options vs cost really Miscellaneous-all the random options

[@arno_groenewald]

The world conquest awareness would be great for a early Cold War build up. This can lead to them working on a cold war successor to Hoi4 and then a Modern day game which can branch off from those end development ideas. If only Paradox had the leverage to do both.

[@stefanburkhard9931]

What I am missing is the option to airlift divions onto or away from airfields. Divisions could be brought into postions behind the front line or this could also be used to evacuate units which have been caught off. This could also make paratroopers more useful, they could be sent in to capture airfields and reinforcments could be brought in later. There is some historical precedent for this, for example the Germans did something like this during the battle of Crete. There should be some weight metric on divisions, as it would not really make sense to fly in a super heavy tank division, but I think for infantry or even light tank divisions it could make sense. Also while we are at it: why is there only 1 type of transport plan for the whole game?😅

[@MEL0N1007]

I would really like to see end-game diplomacy rework. Cold war seems kinda fun. But before that, I'd say they have to make it less laggy, and just like you said the last year, they would have to fix the snowball economy for USSR and USA. I think Great War Redux like demobilization and Kaiserreich like army limitation would be great.

[@sakeburyojo4218]

And I think things could be a lot simpler with car/mech/tank designer: Introducing - Utility Chassis and Armored Utility Chassis The idea comes from the Sd.Kfz. designation of the Wehrmacht, which means that conceptually, a Panzer IV is also a Sd.Kfz. 161 (Special Motor Vehicle 161). A Utility Chassis enables you to design everything: trucks, mechs, armored cars, and some mediocre tanks/SPG/SPAA/TDs. You can still have wheeled, haf-tracked, and tracked suspension to work with, add more weight-carrying capacity to reduce the need of trucks for each support company (i.e. signal, maintenance, logistics), use a half-track to build an army of authentic Panzergrenadiers, or add some armor and a gun to get an armored scout vehicle. You can still build tanks with it, but they will be immediately outdated by the start of the game, like Panzer Is. Armored Utility Chassis (This is basically an upgraded tank designer that we are using) allows you to add much more amor and (fire)power to whatever you're designing than a UC. For memes, you can even have fully-tracked trucks with this. The new chassis also enables some new designations in late game: APCs and IFVs. Imagine a Panther chassis with a small turret with automatic guns, reduce some armor (or not) and add a enlarged crew compartment, that's basically a modern IFV. Or a Sd.Kfz. 250 with an enclosed compartment, sounds like a M113 isn't it? You can also have armored maintenance vehicles for armored maintenance companies, which is an upgraded version of normal maintenance companies for armored divisions only. In this way you only need 1 tech tree and 2 designers. I dunno about coding but this seems much simpler than 3 or even 4 designers and several tech trees to make them work. Also, speaking of train designer, there should have been a type of armored train that could be used to supress resistance. (EDIT: Fix spelling and grammar mistakes)

[@jaxkommish]

For a Wunderweapons category you can open up a lot of the wild ideas like the Habbakuk (a massive aircraft carrier built out of ice and sand), the massive oversized bombers or tanks some of the countries fantasized over, etc

[@gildedphoenix]

Project Ratte: the literal landship that's called... RAT

[@Coid]

Pykrete is a mixture of water and sawdust. IIRC, sand was not involved in the design.

[@empydoodle_gaming]

Special forces rework could work with a designer that you could add attack, defence, org etc bonuses in specific environments and climates, and the higher these bonuses the longer they take to train. So a green battalion of SF that you'd made 30% better attack and def in desert would be no different to standard infantry but level 1 would be have 7.5% bonus of the selected bonuses but take 1.3x longer to reach that level, level 2 gives 15% and so on. Trading bonuses for training time would be the way to do it and would naturally impose a cap (as opposed to the enforced one), and encourage the use of things like field hospitals to preserve as much of the XP as possible because it has more value than standard infantry XP.

[@ThatVillain-the-Gamer]

The train thing, if it happens, would probably be an update to NSB bc a DLC feature reliant on another DLC feature would be unlikely

[@Luredreier]

1:29 Well, one thing is the barrel... But what about the ammo types? High explosives, various types of armour piercing etc. You can have different "chassis deciding if you shoot straight, upwards in an arch or up against the planes, you could have scrapnel based rounds... Different loading speeds, movement speeds, etc, etc... You can add armor shield in front of a direct firing gun to protect against small arms etc...

[@W3f1ndy0u]

What about a coastguard with small ships that you can produce and they defend beaches so you don't need infantry anymore?

[@PandorasBox7777]

The infantry equipment designer could balance the buffs against "weight" and cost of logistics. Weight would effect speed & breakthrough. Cost of Logistics would effect the strain on your supply depots/regional supply. So you could have ultra amazing infantry, but they'd be crippled if they didn't have STRONG supply lines and they'd be really slow and more easily encircled. On the Special Forces changes, they could have an option to roll your Special Forces divisions into your Intelligence Agencies to sabotage your enemies; whether it's infrastructure, factory output, defence stats (forts/AA/Entrenchment), reinforcement rate, garrisons, or whatever depending on eh mission parameters you set in the Intelligence screen or it's own special Forces screen. This way you can use them for special pushes or to weaken points of the enemy for a general push.

[@Raidensreal]

Given the fact that wheeled and half track suspension are already in the tank designer I think that they would just need to add motorized, Armored cars, and Mech to the existing options what you are designing. It is kinda surprising that they didn't just fit it into the existing system when they made the tank designer to be honest. As for Special Forces and Support equipment I think those should both go the way of doctrines and exclusively unlock via XP at current by the time you've been at war for 2 years it gets very easy to have max army XP and all doctrines finished so giving another sink while providing easier access to some of the lesser used support companies would be much appreciated.

[@justmax8741]

I would love to see some kind of economic influence mechanics with the ability to puppet someone(based on trades, relative power, distance, etc.) and a reworked white peace cause the current one doesn't work at all(this one is more probable in near future, at least i want to believe so). I still remember that one Soviet game where UK started a proxy war in Iraq and Iran in 1946 so I needed to start a civil war in France and capture both France and UK with 8 volunteer divs because war exhaustion and white peace aren't existent in base game. Also, some mass destruction weapons rework is needed(rebalance the nukes, add chemical and biological weapons).

[@BackToTheStart47]

It would be cool if adding wheeled suspension or half track to the tank changes the tank classification to mechanized.

[@Drzedan272]

resource leand lease - now we can send oil, why not iron ? and with that some warehouse for the resource, doctrine - if you finish one, you can "discover" another

[@polishscribe674]

As a mechanized sympathizer, I approve. Edit: the difference between armored car amd mechanized is that mech also transports soldiers, while AC is more like a tank with wheels.

[@SubZero-cv5hk]

Well, Artillery (and Anti-Air/Anti-Tank) could've got quite some distinct 'modules' to make a difference - Rifled Barrel vs. Smoothbore Barrel, Longer vs. Shorter Barrel, Stronger Breech Block which allows for higher barrel pressure, resulting in higher velocity of the shell, Squeeze-Bore Barrels, specifically concerning Anti-Air: Single, Twin or Quad Barrels, Heavy MGs, Autocannons, actual big cannons, HEAT or AP Shells for Anti-Tank, Capped Shells vs. non-Ballistic Cap-Shells. All of which would influence Soft/Hard/Air Attack, Reliability and Production Cost. You could even go as far as providing a bonus for combining certain logical modules, e.g. a bigger caliber in combination with HEAT shells would give a bonus to hard attack, since during WW2 bigger calibers worked better for HEAT and did not rely on longer barrels, which in turn would profit when combined with AP/APBC/APDS Shells. Stronger Breech Block buffs Soft/Hard Attack as a metaphor for higher velocity, range etc. but you take a hit on reliablity, since it increases wear. Smoothbore Barrel is cheaper since (correct me if I'm wrong) they're easier to manufacture, but you suffer a penalty to soft / hard and air attack, since they are less accurate (unless combined with APDS/APFSDS, latter one being out of the timeframe). The possibilities are there, altho some of it may be difficult to implement since Soft/Hard/Air Attack pretty much just simplifies range, accuracy, rate of fire, shell weight, etc. down to a single artificial value.

[@titanflameheart8815]

I would love the Ability to transfer ships to other nations that really need it and not just convoys. having old destroyers, subs, and light cruisers sometimes starts to get annoying when it would take just as much time to just build two more newer models than refit one to the same standards as the new one

[@wupwup809]

I would rather have an infantry template designer then an eqipment one trying to balance your squads out it would also be a great combo with a special forces dlc where instead of the three flavors of speial forces you could either focus your squads on specific terrains or have a more balanced elite force.

[@sharpshots5813]

What if for the infantry eq designer, you can design the equipment itself, than designate it to x weapon type. E.g if you have the wooden stock module with a 15 round magazine option using a semi automatic feeding option, you can designate it an infantry rifle. But if you choose to make it a 30 round magazine capacity, but choose pistol caliber catridges, it becomes an SMG. Of course, this would also need to rework infantry into either needing X amount of certain equipment, or just entirely new infantry battalions (Rifle battalions, lmg squad, Sniper squad, pioneer assault squad, etc) Edit: Looking back, this might be too micro intensive for the player, but it sure is fun to think about

[@thompsongunner27]

You could also have mechanized base on tanks, the Communwelth hade the Sherman Kangaroo and Churchill Kangaroo

[@scifidino5022]

A problem with infantry, arty and train designer I noticed: How would you balance the design cost? Army xp? That is already used for division templates, doctrines _and_ tanks. Nav xp and airforce xp both are only used for one designer respectively, making army xp split onto so many designers would make it effectively impossible to design anything.

[@MarkThaDude]

Have a weight threshold for infantry, over encumbering troops with mor equipment lowers infantry base org and/or recovery or org loss. Fatigued soldiers can’t fight as long. Then you could have potential for light/shock/etc infantry designs.

[@purplefood1]

Feedback realising infantry equipment isn't just the guns is hilarious ngl

[@legomanc4555]

I think the most interesting designer, would be the infantry designer, however instead of designing individual soldiers, it would be interesting to design squds. For example, more men MG's for defense or more men with SMG's for offense.

[@blootheshrimp2396]

I thought it would be cool to make two exclusive focuses, one unlocking a wonder weapons tab, and the other giving a research slot

[@freezer20cm64]

Armored car desiger is already in the game, it just lack couple lines of script wich defined "tanks with wheeled suspension and 1 man mg turret" as a armored car. Adding mech in the tank desiger is a metter of 2 hours with new gfx for modules included. And its a lot of mods out there that already done it.

[@eigengrau_rn3657]

For the gun designer, if paradox halved the cost of guns and added more support company slots, I would love to see machine gun companies or sniper companies, it would give an actual use to the gun designer. So, a rifle cost is half of what it is now, but you can make design them to be suited for snipers, automatic rifles, machine guns, so the half cost is balanced

[@jamieoverland1012]

I’d like a vehicle designer which went beyond armoured cars and half tracks. Would be good to take trucks and jeeps and be able to mod them up to create rapid moving hard hitting special forces units. Like stripping back jeeps for speed and decking them out with guns to create vehicles that could be used for raiding and rapid breakthrough with an SAS or Long Range Desert Group style unit. That would be great. Could also increase the number and type of vehicle that could be para dropped or given to partisan groups

[@NoFace.Albion]

Don't need hard water production in Norway... we get hard water in Suffolk mate and you're welcome to it

[@MrTreise]

For me heavy Chesie planes castumozation needed

[@zacharypurdue4584]

For an artillery designer you could go light, medium and heavy, with Radios being an option for extra IC but increase their soft attack, perhaps require a signals company so they can make usage of it. Have heavy artillery take more terrain penalties and essentially allow you to produce light mountain guns, dual purpose artillery capable of engaging tanks and delivering indirect fire like a Zis-3 or maximizing Soft attack with something like a M-30 122mm gun. Medium artillery could cover the 150/152/155 arty, with heavy artillery being the 170, 203 and 210s. Adjust sheer size vs supply consumption, perhaps movement penalties to the division if you load it up with 8 inch guns.

[@cyber_engine]

+++

[@davidreynolds9189]

This is probably a Hearts of Iron V idea, but I would love them to start in say 1910 - 1912 and would go through 1920 ish, then they would add a DLC or update or whatever that pushes the game through 1945, then so on and so forth until until maybe even the 90s or early 2000s, but there would obviously be start scenarios in 1910, 1914, 1930, 1936, 1939, 1945, 1951, then 61, 71, etc. being able to play from the dawn of modern combat in WW1 and then end up in the Cold War. I might just be a weirdo who enjoys long role playing scenarios 🙃

[@curry_be_tasty5051]

If they add mechanized designers, then i'd have to argue, that we should also have Armoured car designers, because this could get armoured cars out of Irrellevance

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

Just add both to the tank designer. If it's got truck or half track suspension it can be designated as an armoured car. And you can add troop transport modules. Adding 1 or note troops modules turns it into mechanized. If you have different sized troop modules you cna also vary how many vehicles a mech battslion requires. These modules would have the same negatives as increasing armour (because like increasing armour the biggest issue is increased weight)

[@therealgaben5527]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 Novum vexillum did this and I rather like it. For mech you just research the light take chassis and then you can change it to either be an IFV(mech) or a light tank

[@pumba3423aga]

About artilery, they could add ability to have bigger caliber artilery, mortars.... (example: 120mm mortar, better soft at., worse suply worse production), also add big AT guns, that are good for entrenching and defence, not for attacking, artilery can be used against tanks also... Rework to research rushing and investing should be posible and freedom in research rushing, Theycould add prepare fallbackline, with prepared entrenchment bonus..(entranchment rework could be good.. trenches wont disapear..)

[@icbm345]

When they added the tank designer, I was kinda shocked they didn't allow you to make armored cars or mechanized from light tanks chassis. Because, you can literally make light wheeled vehicles that can fill the armored car's niche with that designer. And it made armored cars kinda redundant anyways, since their niche was recon, but tanks and motorised do it better in a lot of cases. And armored cars can't be used at all as a line battalion given how badly they fare(At least the early armored car model is just absolutely awful).

[@Xeemix]

For mech/armored car designer, we already have the chassis for that for light tanks, so its literally just adding the roles for them like anti-air/artillery. I agree with inf customizer, it feels like everyone will just slap everything on it and not care, it needs something more to it. Also I've said it once I'll say it a thousand times, I would pay for brown water navies and river warfare, there are so many rivers across the continents and so many countries that could benefit from brown water navies it could really add another dynamic to the game!

[@PG-kt1hz]

What i would Love to See, is an way to create your own puppet nations, for example it would work like that: As Germany, you would select all States in Siberia, click a Button "Create Puppet" And Then choose a Name for it

[@wddaww]

Fatigue would probably be a good balance factor for infantry design

[@markusz4447]

I would like to have heavy and light artillery. Heavy could give a bonus against forts and entrenched troops, while light could have higher soft attack. I know there is stuff like this in mods but I would like it in the base game.

[@df8340]

Mechanized is fantastic if you’re one of the handful of nations with designers that reduce the cost by 15%.

[@ogerpinata-nu2th]

Designers always come with cost. Adding to the cost of military experience one has to expend anyway. Navy and air force are manageable for now but military experience is just very hard to come by in the quantities needed. As a major nation not a huge problem but as a minor nation this could be devastating.

[@colson3050]

mech/car/truck designers should be added to options of the tank designer and have the whole system be touched up abit. imagine if late game using the light fully tracker hull as apcs etc

[@melange78]

As far as history is concerned, the Germans had Manpads in combat during Battle for Berlin so that should be a thing for rockets. I don't know how good they were but we know they were used. The Germans had concept jet engines early, I think even before the war but they just did not apply them but that is not a end game thing from a historical perspective.

[@joneszer1]

13:37 special forces and infantry rework would go hand in hand. There should be a Heavy Special Forces and a Light/Soft Special Forces. Or something like that. Example: Light special forces or elite troops would be Jungle infantry, desert infantry, jaeger Infantry, Arctic infantry, ect. They all have special purposes and all have negatives. Putting desert troops in Russia in winter would have immense attrition and issues Vice versa with winter troops in Africa. Elite/Heavy troops would be Marines, Paratroops, Mountaineers, Shock Troops. Shock Troops have HUGE bonus attack in cities and against forts but they take catastrophic losses and don’t do great on front lines. The infantry equipment update would go great with this as you can kit these specific units for that exact purpose. Shock troops likely should be very heavy infantry that crack fortresses and cities with flamethrower and such and paratroopers get a bonus maybe depending how light they are equipped, the more equipment you give them the more they loses when they drop untimely making their org bad-however once they land if you want them to fight as elite frontline troops you can refit them.

[@carbonado2432]

You Missed my wish. Motorcycle designer and divisions, Sidecar or no sidecar??

[@boomknight1015]

What I'd want in a Train designer is the base trains, then you can add some special ones that do AA, maybe even supply with out a depo. Something that could basically spot make depots at locations but depending on build and amount it effects how many troops it can support. Better yet, use the normal Dora base but the AOE can work like different support companies that just has to be in range to give the buff to your troops. How ever I highly doubt that would be made. It wouldn't change much but it would be fun as a mod.

[@MoBro173]

Armoured trains does AA damage

[@zacharypurdue4584]

If you wanted to do an infantry rework I believe reworking the loadout of the BN, working with heavily armed Bn with mortars, HMGs, infantry guns (kit their actual guns but rather things like SIG-33s), the type and quantity of their AT weapon, then allowing for occasional specialist units to be added like Flamethrowers, assault platoons (representing those Soviet unions with huge quantities of SMGs, who would grant bonuses vs Urban and Forest terrain). Make it so there are trade offs. Make it so someone on the defensive would prefer having HMGs, Mortars and loads of staying power. While someone on the offense would want more GMPG, assault units and flame throwers ideally. Setup certain “weight” and manpower penalties and boom things work better.

[@jr8260]

I wish they would add ammunition. I think it would greatly add to the considerations of offensives and things like strategic bombing and sabotage. I dunno how well the AI would handle it but it even if the AI were to cheat a bit I think it'd make things more interesting for the player

[@romandelasalle]

The infantry equipment designer, when you'll unlock the upgrades for infantry, you'll neeed to upgrade the infantry equipment and then build it to get that bonus?

[@IsaacLong-me6df]

Hear me out I think that prisoners of war would be a great idea that way when units are encircled they don’t go into a massive slaughter of 20 plus divisions and maybe you can exchange POWs that would be great.

[@FeedbackIRL]

💀

[@dr.pop2562]

I was thinking about the special forces and I was thinking maybe they could add new types of SF for France the foreign legion you get more pop of legionnaires by other nations generating world tension and get a bonus against them, and Germany could get the storm troopers they get a bonus breakthrough and or bunker busting treat, and for the UK they get free manpower, for only pilots from annexed nations like Poland and they also get a bonus against the nation that capped them, and for the US they can have Japanese American soldiers and they passively get a intelligence bonus against Japan, for Russia they could get a red-guard bonus ( either they get it from metals or automatically from combat)

[@imspudus]

If they add mechanised designer they could add defensive equipment adding entrenchment and mine layers adding piercing or soft attack, they could also add mechanised at/aa, or increase breakthrough by adding more seats.

[@-___-g]

I want more QOL features. And more tips about what things are/do like ck3

[@michaelholy3851]

Probably for mechanized, they could add „space“, depending on the space more troops can fit in and so you need more or less mechanizeds to fill your divisions

[@hexus_boi1802]

Defence Rework concerning forts would be good if the forts would be reworked in such a way that they reduce soft/hard attack values so early forts reduce only soft attack while researching better forts reduces more hard attack (addition of anti-tank in the bunkers) something like that

[@BlueViper8907]

Dave giving us the bird at 23:39 😂

[@joneszer1]

1:22 Big thing for arty is things like: Ammunition and fuse types and customization of artillery companies. For example, light artillery for Germans would be like 7.5cm LeIG cannon. Then all the way to Heavy ARTY which is like a 203mm Soviet B4s. You can customize these and put them in different units for different purposes instead of your breakthrough inf div being 14/4s it can be 7/2s but with Heavy Arty. Also munitions, HE (soft attack), Smoke (breakthrough), red and white phosphorus (soft attack & breakthrough), ILLUM (night attack, air coordination), ect. And you have to produce these munitions and equip them To specific artillery units. If you just wanna spam HE because you have a poor country then that’s fine but if you’re the US it’s going to better represent your more well equipped nations with big economies. Or for AAA guns, you can put in the proximity rounds for better hit chance idk. There’s a lot of in-depth so maybe not the best for vanilla and maybe more for a hardcore mod.

[@Ajann47]

and why there is no mortars like german 82mm's and russian 120mm's

[@ericvaldivia9073]

I think an armored car acts as poopier light tank Mechanized are really buffed infantry When creating divisions it would affect org and stuff so they are very different things

[@nicholaswilkowski632]

Customization of all infantry equipment. Artillery could be bore size, length, breech mechanism, sights. That way anti air, anti tank, and basic artillery all in one "designer". Then guns: caliber, barrel, stock, etc. Then support equipment being exploded

[@nicolascarvacho4998]

I think the rework of SF must be accompanied with the INF equipment rework. The minigame will be: SF requires specific and expensive INF equipment to be valid for the division template. (you have to put mountain tools, parachutes, waterproof measures in order to build an SF battalion) The cost of the equipment is that in the early years it will have really low reliability and could need a special resource, with the research you can improve the stats. Another cost for INF equipment in general must be training time. the more you put into equipping your INF battalion, more time will be needed to train them (possible make the minimum training requisite get higher to. that also will make advisors with the training time bonus more useful). For SF that will be more expensive in time to, so for example if you want to build a mountain battalion that will cost more iron and more months to deploy. Also, i think you can recreate de CORP LEVEL of command, with task force navy organization. You can put 24 divisions with one general, but that general can have 4 CORPS (task forces) of 6 divisions. But for new or not interested players, you can still have one general with 1 Corp (task force) of 24 divisions

[@legocon2004]

I feel like the end game / demobilization rework would really incentivize players going late game, as long as they do it right and make it exciting. As it is Im usually ending my games by around 1941 or 42 because Ill have ww2 ended and any time after every nation that's still around just spams so many units it begins to lag even on my computer which has no trouble running anything else. If there was any cold war mechanic or just a way to prevent that lag, I would play much longer in my hoi4 campaigns.

[@KanzlerOttoVonBismarck]

There's a feature, that I suppose you could consider defence rework, to have a a retreat line order, essentially a reverse offensive line order, that when active your army is going to slowly give away land when attacked and retreat to a certain line. You could use this to trap an enemy army in a low supply zone to then counterattack them, like a retreat line from libya to el alemein to trap italians in el agheila and then make a counter offensive all the way to tobruk, or make a stalingrad Currently the only way to this is with loads of micro, fallback line to fallback line to make sure your armies do as you wish and don't get overrun on encircled on the way, or to have some divisions on the frontline fall back while some are still pinned in combat leaving gaps on the frontline Or you simply use scorched earth and hope that the enemy attacks you AND that they are strong enough to gain land. It's hell It would be an order to orderly fallback, keeping organization, keeping the frontline all covered, while tiring and tricking the enemy into a trap to be vulnerable to a counteroffesinve Edit: now that I watched the whole section I see feedback essentially got the same idea, plus the "planning bonus" of the defensive order, maybe your general could assign both an offensive order (the arrow forward, to the right), AND a defensive order (an arrow to the left), and you could go from one to the other manually When drawing fallback lines, the game should also highlight rivers, mountains AND forts

[@Zack_Wester]

6:48 Oh I realised I missed that question. but from what I recall the difference between a armored car and a Mechanized is. Armor car does not carry infantry (for the most part beyond any stowaway), a Mechanized or just a Truck is designed to carry infantry long distance, Mechanized can be nuts enouth to carry them to the enemy and then if available provide some light fire support for said infantry, Truck just dont drive to close to the enemy. that something a infantry cargo slot is maybe something we could look into. like if we tried to make a Bradley APC in this it would have 1 infantry slot (carrying 6 passenger or infantry), while something like the Sd.Kfz. 251 (the German Mechanized could carry 10 passenger and those would use 2 infantry slots). wild example. the Bradley M2 (WW2 version), a tracked Mechanized infantry carrier 1 infantry slot, 1 auto cannon (we dont have a turret option here just its weapon), smoke launcher, radio. a what some would call a literal truck (the same truck we use as infantry transport) whit a MG bolted onto the drivers roof and some armor plate wielded to its side and front. 3 infantry slots, 1 MG or 1HMG. and thats it. super cheap way to transport a lot of soldiers whit some kind of armor. so I would make it so that armor car is a veacle whit no passenger slot (if you put a passenger slot on your veacle you can´t class it as a armored car). tracked/half track/wheeled (practically all the same here). Mechanized means its a infantry transport veacle. No you can´t design your own truck (beyond in the designer say mount a MG on it, because HOI4 also have ambulances and Jeeps/motorcycles classified as trucks).

[@jessegd6306]

For the armored car/mechanized designer, I feel like it'd work like the tank designer. If you want a cheap motorized transport, design it and have it classed as a transport, and it'll be used as such, and the modules will help determine how good it is at that role. Give it a larger bed to increase transport capability or supply capacity/usage, have the cabin be open or closed for small production price and health/armor trade, give it a spot for defensive weaponry for a little more cost but affect soft/air attack. Giving it a turret may hinder it's breakthrough or transport capacity since it needs to fit the weapon crew and personnel/cargo, having a simple gunshield and machinegun being almost no penalty aside from production cost, but having an enclosed 1 or even 2-man turret putting in a heavier penalty. It's roles can change depending on weapon, such as armored car having any weapon but cannot be used for infantry transport or logistics, and can be used for armored car recon companies. Anti-air for being a very cheap SPAAG to give regular convoys a small bit of air-attack to defend against convoy strikes, more cheap than an anti-air tank, and anti-tank or artillery carriers to fill out motorized/mechanized divisions without using slightly more expensive tank chassis.