hoi3 ai actually does more historical things than the hoi4 ai though hoi3 is dated, it does has better ai, i'd still rather stick with hoi4. besides greece in the corner kicking italian and bulgarian ass for a bit
i don't see hoi3 as dated. hoi4 on the other hand, is just an ahistorical sandbox with no difficulty at all true hoi3 isn't so hard either, the hardest part is micromanaging that requires patience
hoi3 is most certainly dated, its performance on newer devices is actually LOWER than hoi4. along with the game not having mod support anymore (well there is mods but workshop is easy to use and works well, and most of the mods there require dlc, of which I have none). And aren't sandboxes good? And the micromanaging is easy. Along with hoi3 confusing hq system I only found out recently. And their strange building system as well. Hoi4 manages to just replace all of these with more simpler and easier to understand to the point where you can understand it instantly, I only found out how to increase my IC in hoi3 in 15 hours of playtime. That is not good, maybe I didn't understand jack shit as I got hoi3 before hoi4 when hoi4 was already out. You are completely right about hoi4 being ahistorical, but thats cause the ai is shit, and the game was rushed.
no, it's ahistorical to pander to casuals who want to conquer the world as slovakia and don't need to think about resource management, or actual strategy. also, if it took you 15 hours to find out you can build factories like other things in production interface than im really sorry for you. Perhaps, if you were new to hoi franchise, it would had been a good idea to read the manual?
what fucking manual, there was none. and again, the game was RUSHED, its basically an early access game, they can still make it hard. and that whole not figuring out how to make IC was just an exaggeration, I do not remember when I figured out how to.
at the start they look pretty behind in technology and industry, but when factories get heated and start to pumping out infantry divisions, tanks, airplanes then strength in numbers prevails as the war progresses
@JL-CptAtom "The USSR was on hung more than a that propped up by the Jews ant the American War machine as a way to make money." - As a sentence makes absolutely zero sense, both in content, and grammar. The US was crucial in mobilizing the USSR's military, from late 1943 onwards, but in the crucial early war period (1941 and 1942), the Soviet Union was on its own and won.
America provided lots of food, supplies, aircraft, ships and weaponry to the British and the Soviet through Lendlease. Stalin himself gave a toast that "without american production, this war would have been lost". To be fair though WW2 was very much a team victory, the British blockaded Germany and stayed in the war, keeping Germany locked down from expanding its influence worldwide, the Soviet Union deserves alot of credit as they are the ones who truly destroyed the German Army and bled them dry despite terrible cost. Germany lost because they fought too many enemies at once, turned the conquered populations against them with their brutality and of course they didn't have enough oil.
