![]() ![]() Pros of smaller templates are that they have very high organization for their combat width. Some variance exists depending on your starting region, but most players won’t have to worry about this. The best widths are usually considered 10, 15, 18, 27, and 41-45. There is no single best combat width now, instead there are several effective combat widths to choose from. ![]() If you aren’t familiar with the division designer, be sure to check out our guide on it to acclimate yourself with the interface. That said, these templates will serve you well as either a starting point to create your own, or as an easy way to have a strong military without worrying about min-maxing in the division designer. Some factors you will have to take into account if you modify these divisions are your industrial capacity, location, who you are fighting, and your fuel. Below you will find some strong generalized templates, but the absolute best division depends heavily on your circumstances in game. Luckily, I’m here to walk you through the most optimal division templates in the game, discussing their purpose and when to use them.ĭue to the Barbarossa update and the No Steps Back DLC, designing the “perfect” division in Hearts of Iron IV is nearly impossible. Limits are often the most interesting thing in a design, and I don't think it's a surprise that CK2 is the best designed PDX game, and it has a ton of soft limits - the most important being you can't control much land directly, and land is the most important resource in the game.With limitless possibilities to designing your divisions in Hearts of Iron IV, it is easy to be overwhelmed when you open the division designer. You also start with stuff and are frequently given more stuff after countries collapse etc.Įven if this was true, why would it be a good thing? Maybe this is just my taste in games changing, but the more games I play the less I'm interested in the philosophy of you can do anything you want, you're so special and powerful. This isn't actually true - the game handles tons of heavy lifting for you, so you're reliant on its systems to distribute stuff, manufacture stuff etc. Where you put them, what kind of tanks are helping them out, how much air cover is up there and how advanced any of that technology is. Every division that’s out there, every General responsible for an army, every gun in a soldier’s hands and how much fuel and ammo they’ve got at their disposal has been up to you. I just want to pick up on one more thing: They acknowledge some of the expansions aren't great but brush over it with "you can disable them!", which is not really a good solution for selling a bad product. I don't think they can really see some of the gaping flaws with this game like army composition just being a non-problem, supply/fuel barely being an issue so you can easily fight wherever/however, naval combat has all these variables/systems but remains unplayable, how many of the systems from HoI3 base game were ripped out and haven't come back after many updates, and the worst problem of all: the AI just plain sucks. That's great, but it's still very much a honeymoon phase for them. This review feels very much like someone who hasn't really got into these games before, and this is the first one they clicked with. Yeah weird how there are no other games like the fourth Hearts of Iron game. ![]() I’ll repeat what I said back when I first reviewed it: it’s a strategy game like no other. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |