PDA

View Full Version : Hearts of Iron


Resource Consumer
11-11-2002, 13:53:04
This looks potentially very good. However, if you hated Europa Universalis then you'll probably hate this.

Here's a review

http://www.sgo.cc/reviews/hearts_of_iron/index.shtml

Venom
11-11-2002, 15:42:00
If I didn't play EU, what will I think?

Resource Consumer
11-11-2002, 16:00:41
You won't.

Sean
11-11-2002, 16:03:11
100-0?

BoltyBoy
11-11-2002, 16:19:32
This looks v nice. EU I & 2 had me up till 3am many times so I better stock up on Pro+ now.

Greg W
27-03-2004, 04:03:59
Yay, just finished (kinda) a game as France. Conquered all of Italy, most of the Balkans, and 1/2 of Germany. The Russians beat me to the other half. :bash:

Though I did take a bit of a pounding in SE Asia from the Japs, mostly due to an inability to get supplies to Hanoi. Doh! Anyway, not sure that I could be bothered trying to finish the game, cos I think that wiping out Japan would be more of a hassle than it's worth.

Getting back into it, 'tis a good game (IMHO). Had a blast this time. Maybe I'll play Italy next time, see if I can kick the snot out of the English in Africa. :)

MDA
27-03-2004, 07:33:57
Originally posted by Greg W
Anyway, not sure that I could be bothered trying to finish the game

So you surrendered?

Greg W
27-03-2004, 22:27:37
Nah, I decided to keep on playing for a while, see what the techs later on did. And get the Japs the hell out of my provinces in Vietnam. Now that I have done that though I may just stop playing this game and start another.

maroule
27-03-2004, 22:47:46
Originally posted by MDA
So you surrendered?

*ahem* the only one who did any surrendering here is the guy that has failed to send me his CM turn for six months

Greg W
10-04-2004, 12:48:14
They have finally released the 1.06 patch for the game. And man, oh man, has the game just gotten a hell of a lot harder. Soviets with 300 divisions running around in Eastern Poland, China giving Japan a run for it's money, you name it, it's a whole new ballgame.

Chris
10-04-2004, 19:30:24
They used the 'Victoria' AI for the new patch, that AI fights back.

In 43, my Americans landed in the marshalls, and Japan counter-attacked with 30 divisions, as well as ships and even air power.

All unheard of before.

Qweeg
03-05-2004, 14:02:03
Just got the game.. not really getting into it so far. I loaded up as Britain thinking to help fight the Italians in Ethiopia, and back the Republicans when the Spanish Civil War kicks off, thinking to make Germany's quest for European domination that much harder... then it was time to go to bed. Haven't really bothered/had time to play since. Not as easy to get into as EU2 was, and not really the kind of game I'm into (that I anticipate Victoria being) this ones more a war game with complications then a civilisation/nation-running game with wars.

Only a few more days to go before I swing by my local GAME an dance home to slap-it-on!:)

Chris
03-05-2004, 15:28:29
Britain won't be allowed to intervene, all democracys in the game are prevented from declaring war until the population war value reaches 100%.

Qweeg
03-05-2004, 16:38:00
Not that way, by sending expeditionary forces (George Orwell will be amongst the militias in Spains case, for historical accuracy :) ), and any other indirect means I can think of.

Chris
03-05-2004, 17:41:13
Don't send to much, Spain can't supply giant armies, limit to a few divisions.

You could also help by giving them military techs, that would really help, especailly if they are for infantry and artillery.

Qweeg
03-05-2004, 18:46:47
That's something I don't really like in HoI, the economy is based on this wierd barter system, and I can't just give Spain or Ethiopia 'a bunch of money', can't even supply them with supplies...

Chris
03-05-2004, 20:05:49
Viccy really handles things better I think.

Greg W
03-05-2004, 23:20:36
You can send em supplies. Just set up a convoy from one of your home provinces to one of theirs. Then specify what you want to send em. Voila. Though, unfortunately you never see the direct results, they do hapen.

Qweeg
19-05-2004, 11:08:16
It's abit weird that the nazi's and the holocaust is never mentioned in this game, it's as if you can play Germany with its black white and red flag and that's all. And the German head of state is called Adolf Hitler, but that's all. I don't know how I feel about a game (even a good game) that edits history for entertainment purposes like that. Even if they had included all the ugly details of what WW2 involved, I still don't know if that'd sit well...

Similar issues were raised playing Victoria, when I had a brief go as America and found the place littered with slaves. Then I decided to stick with it for awhile, free em and beat up the CSA. A couple of game weeks wen't by then there was a slave rebellion near New York somewhere. I figured I'd let em rebel and secceed as an independant nation, then go in, and satalitte or annex them, thus taking them back into the Union as full citizens. Unfortunately I couldn't do that because the provionce held a valuable factory. Putting down the slave revolt actually made me feel sick. Games shouldn't do that. So I abandoned that game and wen't on to play as Japan.

See, this is exactly the kind of thing I mean when I say history sucks, even in top-game form.

LoD
19-05-2004, 12:29:21
So, likewise you woulnd't want to crush an uprising in a Jewish ghetto, now would you?

Chris
19-05-2004, 16:18:01
Originally posted by Qweeg
It's abit weird that the nazi's and the holocaust is never mentioned in this game, it's as if you can play Germany with its black white and red flag and that's all. And the German head of state is called Adolf Hitler, but that's all. I don't know how I feel about a game (even a good game) that edits history for entertainment purposes like that. Even if they had included all the ugly details of what WW2 involved, I still don't know if that'd sit well... This is more a side-effect of some laws in Europe.
Paradox could not sell a game with Nazi symols in France or Germany, which would cut their sales by a wide margin, because it is illeagal.

Similar issues were raised playing Victoria, when I had a brief go as America and found the place littered with slaves. Then I decided to stick with it for awhile, free em and beat up the CSA. A couple of game weeks wen't by then there was a slave rebellion near New York somewhere. I figured I'd let em rebel and secceed as an independant nation, then go in, and satalitte or annex them, thus taking them back into the Union as full citizens. Unfortunately I couldn't do that because the provionce held a valuable factory. Putting down the slave revolt actually made me feel sick. Games shouldn't do that. So I abandoned that game and wen't on to play as Japan.

See, this is exactly the kind of thing I mean when I say history sucks, even in top-game form. The free the slaves event is broken in the V1.03 patch, previously, if the Union won the civil war, you were allowed three kinds of reconstruction, but all of them allowed all alve pops to become farmer pops.

Greg W
20-05-2004, 03:48:21
Hang on Qweeg - you say you're disappointed there's no mention of the holocaust, and then say that putting a slave revolt down made you feel sick?

Is the point that you're trying to make that it's very hard to make a historically accurate game without including a lot of the seedier elements of history (slavery, holocaust for ex), and yet including them would turn a lot of people off?

Sorry, just don't get your point from that post...

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 07:31:51
Yup, that's what I'm saying Greg. I had an unsettling feeling looking at the German leadership in HoI (Goerring, Goebels, Himler, that Blond Beast chappy) and it felt nasty running a slave-ridfdled society and putting them down. Yet if in HoI the nazi leadership wasn't included, it would be a less realistic representation, if it was more realistic it would be full of unpleasant and illegal nazi imagery.

Then again there's no reason why the deathcamps should not be represented (no need to have them include nazi iconography) considering how much of a drain on the German military effort all that infrastructure, fuel and man-power cost to support the central and murderous theme of National Socialism. Any WW2 game at national level that wants to reflect the war accurately, and goes so far as to incude the ministers at the time, and the units comprising the German army etc, would have to also map the huge death system they put in place, as that too effected the war. Anything else is not an accurate model. But again, had Paradox done that, the game would be quite sick.

I think I've stumbled on the field of 'Ethics in Gaming' or something. Maybe we've all come along way from cheerily lopping off the heads of undead people and blowing up aliens without wondering at the right or wrongs.

Greg W
20-05-2004, 07:51:02
Actually, when Sid Meier did Colonization, a lot of people complained that there was no mention of the slave trade in it. Esp as that was a major piece of labour back in those days. Sid (and whoevere else designed it) just thought the whole matter was too controvercial, so they left it out completely. That was, what, early 90s?

Personally I am glad that they left the death camps out of the game. Makes it more of an "alternate" WWII to me.

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 08:25:31
Like a WW2 where all the blood is ketchup:)

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 08:35:38
Maybe the underlying point is that there are some parts of History that really shouldn't be toyed with. But we toy with em anyway coz the game potential is juicy. Abit like film really.

Darkstar
20-05-2004, 09:42:39
Well, if you wanted to be accurate, you could abstract it and not show the details.

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 11:19:54
It's not that I want it to be accurate, just caught an inconsistency error occuring over some moral aspects. Hi degree of accuracy except a gaping hole where a major nazi pre-occupation was. Like that it's a gaping hole, to fill it would be grossly uncool. So Paradox were abit damned either way.

Greg W
20-05-2004, 12:06:05
Well, there's a lot of people that want to play what are basically wargames liek HoI, but without all the "evils". Like the crusades. The atrocities that went on there were, well, atrocious. And I don't think there's been (well known anyway) a game yet that depicts them.

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 13:19:05
Would that be the old Rape n Pillage combo? Coz that's a fairly generic atrocity type, the Vikings were well into that kind of thing. Didn't see a single rape or pillaging in that Vicking game. Anyway I also like playing games like HoI with the 'serious evil' content toned right down. But maybe it's not good to forget what the whole shebang was all about, is editing history for fun... wrong? Can we or should we feel alright about taking the bits we like of a vast and bloody war that killed millions, and using them to ammuse ourselves while not mentioning the more unpalatable stuff, as if those pesky details suddenly 'un-exist' and are now 'outside of history'?

If I studied sociology or something I'd consider it a decent enquirey anyway.

Chris
20-05-2004, 15:44:35
I think you also have to consider commercial viability Qweegy.

Germans today probaly don't want to be reminded that fifty years ago people wern't so, shall we say, understanding of other cultures. All the beligerants of WWII (Britain, Germany, USA, Japsn ect) all could be termed what we today would call racist or racially insensitive, which I think would not go over well with the modern gaming public.

As for wars, every war includes bad things, name a war, and we can find bad things about it usually.

Be that as it may, the Axis in the game should indeed have to have some kind of economic drain, but this was due to Hitler's decision to concentrate on his Final solution, even if it cost him the war.

I'm not sure if adding that stuff to games really is a good idea though.

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 16:22:13
Nah me niether... and of coarse you're right about wars generally. I don't think I stressed dodgy-morality in war and strategy games regarding race and racial sensitivity in particular, although those two examples are related to that I suppose.

Of course todays buying public wouldn't really stand for what we call politicaly incorrect... games (we are assured). I was thinking more on how the game designers rationalised how much they included of the 3rd Riech, and the curious balance I think they came to.

Chris
20-05-2004, 17:03:32
The Nazis and Japanese both were committing mass murder, but so where the Americans and British through bombings, and the Russians through the usual Russian ways.

None of that would much help a game, but then , games on non-violent topics rarely sell well.

Qweeg
20-05-2004, 17:18:46
It's just weird that in all those screens, although you can build and research and upgrade bombers and nukes and armies, you can't 'research deathcamp' or 'switch output from pillows to soap' or 'upgrade gas-chamber group seven' or anything. Good! But really that would be the logical expectation of HoIs level of detail.

A curious balance, but wise.

Greg W
21-05-2004, 00:46:06
With the crusades, I am talking about what basically amounted to mini-Genocide. Killing the entire population of a town/city because they had held out for a seige, or to be correct, the army that had fled inside had held out for a seige. And not just killing them, but torturing, mutilating and raping them. Some gruesome stuff there. There's a great book on it (that is supposedly from his great*20 grandfather's diary) by Stephen rivelle - A Booke of Dayes. And to do it, under the jurisdiction of the Pope, who had already guaranteed that by going on this crusade, all your sins would be absolved, and you'd be guaranteed a place in Heaven...

Qweeg
21-05-2004, 07:14:04
I'd heard that christians were the first Jihadi's, Islam owes allot of its militant style of today to those christians.

Greg W
21-05-2004, 08:30:29
Pretty much.

Chris
21-05-2004, 15:51:31
Not true actually, Islam spread through North Africa and into Spain before being stopped in France in the 8th century, so the honor still belongs to Islam.

The Crusades were really just a way for Europe to rid itself of violent and illeterate soldiers who had no hope of getting land, so they were told to go take it from Islam, which sounded good to guys used to taking what they wanted by force.

MDA
21-05-2004, 16:20:42
Join the crusades, meet interesting people, kill them and take their stuff!

Qweeg
21-05-2004, 17:48:48
Well, the 'muslim world' was pretty much all conquored.

Anyway, Islam is a peaceful religion, and not an aggressively expansionist monoculture at all. Likewise Christianity. Having said any of that- I still refuse to consider buying Crusader Kings.

Chris
21-05-2004, 19:02:26
It is supposed to be a 'dumbed down' version of EU.

I myself prefer Victoria out of all their games, simply because each game is so different depending on the nation chosen. My two best Vitoria games were with tiny, helpless countries (Texas and the Papal States) and both ended the game on top. Try something similar in HoI, isn't going to happen.

Darkstar
21-05-2004, 21:46:30
Qweeg, chopping out the nasty bits to make a fun game is just commercially WISE. The game isnt' meant as an education tool... it's meant as an entertainment aid. And for games, developers always have to make decisions as to what level of detail to put in, and what to leave out. How many people would have fun worrying over the Death Camps? Not many. How many would it ruin the fun of? More then enjoy worrying about administering Death Camps? So, game-wise, it's smarter to not worry about it.

Think about it... would it make the game more fun for you? Or less? That's what is important. It's not a teaching tool, after all.

Greg W
22-05-2004, 04:35:30
CK is quite fun actually. It's more of a "dynasty" simulator than much else, though you do get to pay around with hiring and firing Dukes, which is fun. Some major imbalance issues atm though, so if you're even thinking of buying it, wait till 1.03 comes out.

And yes, it is nowhere near as complicated as even HoI, but it is still fun despite that, and the fact that it's far too easy in some places (conquering pretty much anyone, as the AI doesn't use it's vassal's troops), and far too hard in others (the Mongols are near impossible to to halt other than through cheesy sploits).

Once 1.03 comes out I'll think about a review, cos it's not really worth it until that point