From Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

List - This article is considered a List-class article on the wiki quality scale

Persia/Iran[edit source]

It's nice to see we've had a clean-up of the country list and the country pages, but I just noticed something weird. Persia's marked with an asterisk, while I'm pretty sure the game has it (or Iran) as a starting country in '36. What's the situation? GothicEmperor (talk) 19:46, 31 May 2016 (CEST)

User:Sir Garnet Views were and are divided on what to call the country, but from 1935 into the 1950s the government used the name Iran so that would be historically appropriate (is there a definitive outline, list or guide as to what should and should not go in the Countries section for particular countries?).

Sorting[edit source]

Should the countries be sorted like the EVW wiki, or something different? Medibee (Talk | Contribs) 23:13, 24 January 2014 (CET)

I think by continent is a good starting point at least. ~ Meneth (talk) 23:25, 24 January 2014 (CET)
Sounds good to me Medibee (Talk | Contribs) 23:27, 24 January 2014 (CET)

Nazi flag?[edit source]

Should we use the Nazi flag as it was historically, or should we use the German empire flag as it is in HOI3 and (probobly)4. ~ Medibee (Talk | Contribs) 23:43, 24 January 2014 (CET)

German Empire flag, as that's the one most likely to be in HoI4. We'll follow whatever they choose. ~ Meneth (talk) 23:46, 24 January 2014 (CET)
Sounds good to me. ~ Medibee (Talk | Contribs) 23:50, 24 January 2014 (CET)

Lybia[edit source]

Is there a particular reason why Lybia is not in the list? Because Egypt is, despite it doesn't exist as an independent country at the game's start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:40, 23 June 2016‎ (CEST)

I looked through the list of countries in the game folder /common/countries and noticed that also East Germany, Iceland, Israel and West Germany are not listed. Some of them does not have cores at the start of the game and can be created as a result of war (E. and W. Germanies for sure). Maybe such countries should be marked in their own way. Persia is listed as Iran, Spain as Republican Spain, Yeman as Yemen — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:00, 23 June 2016‎ (CEST)

Merger Proposal[edit source]

I believe that the page Country tag is unnecessary given that the Countries page lists all of the tags. There's precedence for this on the EU4 wiki, in which both Country tag and Tag redirect to Countries. Thelivingded (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2016 (CEST)

Population: Core vs Non-Core[edit source]

Right now the population listed for each of the countries appears to be a summation of core and non-core values. I feel this can be misleading since nations have much reduced conscription potential from non-core populations, and makes it seem like France and Britain will be able to overwhelm Germany with vast human waves for example. I believe it would be useful to have a column showing just the core population every country has. Mathcube (talk)

Major Power?[edit source]

"Major Power" redirects to the Countries page, but the page lacks any explanation of what makes a country qualify as a major power. Is this a misaimed redirect, or info that should be on the page and is missing? Jorlem (talk) 12:14, 30 June 2016 (CEST)

Hello, Jorlem. From my research, the words "Major Power" don't appear in the game, nor anywhere else on the wiki. They only appear twice officially (to my knowledge), in Dev Diary #32, in which the United States is referred to as "the only major power outside Eurasia", and in the news post about Dev Diary 3, in which it says that "Each major power has a custom tree of decisions where you can set out your immediate and future goals". This last statement would seem to indicate that "Major Power" is synonymous with the "Interesting Countries" shown after you select your scenario in the game (or would have been, before the Poland DLC), however Dev Diary 3 was a very early Dev Diary, and they seem to have dropped this naming convention. I believe that given that it isn't any sort of mechanic within the game, nor is it, to my knowledge, a widely used term to refer to something specific among the player base, an explanation would only serve to confuse people, and I also don't believe that it should be pointed anywhere else. Whether the redirect should exist at all is up for debate, but I think given how relatively out of the way redirects are, it's fine as it is. Thelivingded (talk) 13:14, 30 June 2016 (CEST)
Thank you. I'm not sure what the proper term is then, but I've seen it used to talk about which nations must be conquered for a faction to surrender. For example, in one of my games, I couldn't defeat the allies until Brazil capitulated (USA went fascist that game), after having conquered France, the UK, and the British Raj. I was hoping to figure out what designates a certain country as being able to keep a faction going until it falls. Thanks. Jorlem (talk) 19:23, 30 June 2016 (CEST)
Well, according to my research, we don't actually know what qualifies as a "major power", or in other words a nation that can become the faction leader after the current one is defeated. There's some speculation about it being a calculation based on industry base on /r/hoi4, however as far as I can tell nobody knows for sure. What I am sure about is that the information probably doesn't belong on this page, and would be best served with a redirect to another page once we figure out the best way to convey what we do know, on an appropriate page. Thelivingded (talk) 02:01, 1 July 2016 (CEST)
Okay, I've dedicated some more time to researching this, and it would seem that the most oft-quoted qualifier for what makes a nation a major power, including this post by a forum mod, is that 50 factories makes a nation "major". I've seen this question asked several times on the forums without a dev response, so at least until a dev responds, I'm going to add this information to the factions page, and change the redirect to go there. Thelivingded (talk) 10:11, 1 July 2016 (CEST)

The Map[edit source]

Does a version of the map exist without the victory points? I personally feel that the current one is less visually appealing and occasionally obscures the province borders. If that does exist, it would probably be better to have that at the top of the page where the other is currently and the one currently there perhaps lower down. -- 07:14, 27 July 2016 (CEST)

why don't they have a similar table in the game as a ledger?[edit source]

I know they have some of the info on the countries tabs, but it would be way more convenient. They do it for EU4.

Releasable nations[edit source]

Should releasable nations have their own page or their own table? With Man the Guns adding at least 59 new tags, there will be at least 89 releasable/event only tags. This is more than the amount of countries (82) in 1936. If so, what information should the table have? Currently, releasable nations don't have much information on the table. I think the table should at least include the number of cored states they have in 1936, which nations are able to release them, and ideology when released as a non-puppet. As for the 3 event based tags (Slovakia, East and West Germany), they should be included in this section. Another question I have is why do some of the releasables have a long form name like Vietnam and Georgia? AkatsukiEmpire (talk) 04:07, 26 September 2018 (CEST)

Kazakh Flag[edit source]

The only Kazakh flag available is the communist Kazakh flag, and if I remember correctly, in game Kazakhstan is democratic but with high communist popularity. Can someone upload a democratic Kazakhstan flag?

Edit: issue has been solved. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilats (talk) 7:30, 4 May 2019‎ (CEST)

New Countries[edit source]

I'm in the process of adding pages for a lot of the new releasable countries (take a look at the Soviet Central Asian releasables). But of course, I can't do the job alone. Can anyone help in improving the new pages?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilats (Talk) 11:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to the wiki. While the effort is appericated since those nations are mostly for flavor and lack any meaningful content their pages are likely to be removed (or turned into redirects instead). ~ SolSys (talk) 12:22, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Personally, I think that every country, no matter how minor deserves a page (I mean Bhutan has a page) but you're probably right. However, I'll still add the pages in, hoping that they won't get deleted and will instead be improved.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilats (Talk) 18:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
That will just create more work for the moderation team who will need to remove them. While it understandable that you hope they will be improved there isn't actual content to fill them with -- as you may have noticed yourself since they are mostly the same. If you wish, you can redirect them to the table instead so they would still be of use. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~. ~ SolSys (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
You didn't need to remove the pages and there was more information on them than the two numbers per country they now redirect to. Also releasable nations being not notable because they are "mostly for flavor and lack any meaningful content" is a weak argument because many existing countries are also mostly for flavor and lack meaningful content (Bhutan, El Salvador etc. as Nilats pointed out). Writing a guide for Kingdom of Morocco isn't any less meaningful than writing one for Haiti. I'm not saying it would have happened any time soon, but it surely won't when the page is deleted. Just as it's not sure that Nilats would have made edits in other areas of the wiki but you sure did your part making it much less likely, while this wiki is starved for contributors compared to the huge backlog of work. Bitmode (talk) 15:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Moderator response:

First, I'm sorry you feel that way. The wiki staff is here to help and, when needed, redirect editorial efforts.
Second, as is evident by your own examples, putting up over a 100 pages consisting of nothing more than the country styleguide framework does not mean they would have had any content added to them later (even 2 years after the page's creation). These pages, along with the given examples, would have ended up removed in the next editorial pass the HoI4 wiki would have gotten -- the difference this time was that it was caught in the beginning.
Third, based on past experience the existence of such pages hurts the wiki more than benefits it. Users viewing them don't find useful content and complain about it later -- and no, they don't improve them, instead demanding the wiki volunteer staff to "fix" them.
Lastly, while it may not seem as such at the moment, the point of the above action was to avoid "wasted" efforts by Nilats and maybe redirect those editorial efforts to more promising avenues so they would be able to enjoy their work later on as well. Regards, SolSys. ~ SolSys (talk) 09:59, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Pages for Releasable countries[edit source]

I feel like that the releasable countries should have there own pages like Angola and Turkmenistan WindowsXPMapping1 (talk) 00:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I think there should be a section for formable countries[edit source]

I think formable countries such as Austria-Hungary, the chinese empire and others should have sections as well

Compliance[edit source]

Due to the compliance mechanic in 1.9 the resource and factory amounts probably need to be changed for all countries holding non-core states. --Bitmode (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

India[edit source]

British Raj can become India. Can someone note in the table for that line? Text searching "India" doesn't help cuz it's not there.

Spelling errors[edit source]

There's a few parts after the list of countries where "which" is misspelled "witch". That is probably something that should be fixed.--Auzewasright (talk) 19:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Portugal[edit source]

Only 2 research slot since LaRes.

Fixed. --RandomGuy45678 (talk) 16:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Flags[edit source]

I noticed a few mistakes in the flags used on the wiki.

For example:

  • Afghanistan uses a historical mid-20th century flag on the wiki, while the game features a modified modern flag.
  • Mexico has a different flag, the eagle on it is not completely surrounded by the plant, only half.
  • Tannu-Tuva on the wiki uses the neutrality flag from the game.
  • Peru uses a slightly different flag with different proportions and details.

Can someone fix this? I am very bad at handling graphic editors and finding real flags :) Yours faithfully, DaddySugar331 (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

For the examples that you've listed, after checking the game files I've found this:
  • The Mexican flag is correct: the game uses the 1934-1968 flag of Mexico, which does look like that. However, the democratic (rather than non-aligned, as which Mexico starts) flag of Mexico does use the modern flag, which is the one you're describing.
  • While the Peruvian flag is incorrect, I legitimately cannot find any flag that looks like that. I've checked Wikipedia, and I found nothing like the in-game flag.
  • The wiki also uses an incorrect flag for the Soviet Union, using the historical flag rather than the modern one used in-game.
Unfortunately, the highest resolution at which the game stores flags is 82x52, so extracting flags from the game is not an option. I won't be able to fix the Peruvian flag because of that, but thank you for pointing out the errors.--RandomGuy45678 (talk) 13:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Historical Background[edit source]

What do you think about removing the "Historical Background" section from the country pages? I don't see much sense in the existence of this section on the wiki about the game. If someone wants to read the history of Albania, he can go to Wikipedia or any other resource. Instead of this section, it would be possible to insert an in-game description of the country, which can be read on the start screen. Yeah, not all countries have it, but it will be more useful than a section about the history of Iraq in XX century. DaddySugar331 (talk) 20:18, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Pages for releaseables.[edit source]

Should the pages for releasables (aside from possibly Egypt) be changed to be redirects to the Countries page? This includes Tahiti and Ukraine. Personally, I do not see a reason for them to exist. Releasables are rarely played with the exception of Egypt. Strategies for formable nations (Tahiti's strategy section) could be said within the formables.

If releasable nations are allowed to exist, what should be the required notability? I'd say even including Egypt as the only exception is debatable, while all other releasables are much less notable. --RandomGuy45678 (talk) 21:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

  • I think it is better to create separate pages about formable countries in which a variety of strategies for forming a country can be presented. And just leave the present article as a summarizing one. DaddySugar331 (talk) 11:26, 17 September 2021 (UTC)