Dev Corner — After Strategy

HOI4 Dev Corner Energy: Energy Becomes a Local Resource, Outside Any Planned Expansion

Mon, 05 Oct 2026 00:00:00 GMT

On October 1, 2026, Paradox published the “Energy” Dev Corner for Hearts of Iron IV. The post presents it as a separate idea, not planned for any expansion and possibly arriving in a future War Effort update. Its subject: turning energy into a real local resource, with power plants, dams and coal.

Update, October 26, 2026: on October 7, Paradox came back to the topic with “Energy #2” and opened it as an open beta, while saying it is unsure whether it will release the system. The power plant now takes a state slot, up to 3 levels, and oil matters too. The beta notes add a country-wide power pool (Steam).

Why Paradox is revisiting coal

Coal arrived with the free update that shipped alongside the No Compromise, No Surrender expansion. Paradox says it did not end up where the studio wanted, and nerfed its effects until they stopped mattering. Feedback pointed to a deeper flaw: dams and experimental plants, such as the nuclear reactors in the Götterdämmerung expansion, produced no electricity at all. They only lowered power usage inside one state.

The new system fixes that: a power plant produces electricity, and coal becomes a booster again, burned only on top of that base. It also solves a problem of the previous version, which punished small nations without coal heavily.

How energy is produced

The power plant becomes a state building. It produces electricity according to the terrain, and stands for many small local efforts rather than one single plant. A nation without coal can therefore still expand its network.

Regular industry produces energy as well, usually enough to build basic equipment. Dams provide a static amount while keeping their state bonuses, and research improves them a little. A power plant can burn coal up to a limit to produce more, which matters most for costly equipment. Coal only shows as a deficit if the player really needs it.

How it is consumed

Each production line draws power according to what it builds, mostly based on the resources it uses. Aluminum costs far more than steel. Basic infantry equipment draws very little, while mass-producing airframes is power hungry. Some buildings cost energy too: the Synthetic Refinery, for instance, draws a constant 5.

Paradox gives one example, AI-controlled Italy in May 1936. Around half of its energy goes to building ships and the other half to land equipment, with a fairly even split between basic equipment and aircraft.

What the post leaves open

The system works as it does today, with a ratio to fulfill. Missing it brings downsides, which Paradox describes as generally not very punishing. The October 1 post gives no percentage for the shortage penalty, no coal cap per plant and no release window, and the interface is still a work in progress. It closes by asking for the community’s opinion.

For players, the interest is in tying production to geography: making aircraft in a poorly supplied state will no longer cost the same. But while the penalties and the release decision stay unknown, this is a design proposal more than a settled novelty.

Going further

HOI4: Two Dev Corners in One Week Question the Civilian Economy and Military Production

Sun, 02 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMT

On July 21 and 28, 2026, Zwirbaum, a game designer on Hearts of Iron IV at Paradox, published two Dev Corners back to back on the game’s economy: one on the civilian economy and consumer goods, the other on military production. Neither announces a change. They are lists of questions put to the community, and that is exactly what makes them worth reading.

Update, October 26, 2026: on September 8, a follow-up Dev Corner ruled out a full overhaul of military production and introduced “Industrial Parks”, specialized buildings (a military and a shipyard version) meant to give factory location and specialization more weight. Paradox stresses that everything remains subject to change (Steam).

Civilian economy: consumer goods that only punish

The July 21 Dev Corner covers three topics: the civilian economy in the broad sense (construction, civilian factories used for trade, laws), consumer goods, and economic laws. The sharpest passage concerns consumer goods, which Zwirbaum calls purely “negative”: it is always better to lower their percentage demand. He asks players whether that role works, narratively and in gameplay terms.

Economic laws get the same critique. The designer notes that higher mobilization is almost always the better choice, then asks how players would react to more nuance between laws.

What matters here is who is asking. Paradox itself names two known flaws, a penalty with no upside and a setting that always has one right answer. On paper that announces no solution, but the criticism comes from the team rather than from players, and that is the real difference in weight.

Military production: a pool of interchangeable factories

The July 28 Dev Corner describes military production as an abstract pool of factories. Players can always reassign factories to whatever they need, and the top-priority production line is the last to go offline if industry is hit. Zwirbaum adds that all factories are pretty much equal and can build whatever you want, then asks whether players like that universal model.

The third question is about geography. Do you place factories close to your enemies, as far from them as possible, or only where local construction bonuses are best, such as dams or infrastructure? Paradox wants to know whether that is enough strategic decision-making or whether other considerations are needed.

What these questions do not say

A Dev Corner is not a Dev Diary. Paradox spells it out in the first post: the format gathers feedback and may hint at future content, but promises nothing. No schedule comes with either post.

In practice the context still matters. Since July 6, the summer open beta has been reworking land combat, artillery and doctrines. The two Dev Corners target the game’s other pillar, industry. For players, the useful reading is modest: the same designer carries both efforts, which suggests joined-up thinking without proving that an overhaul is decided.

If you want to influence where the game goes, the threads under both Dev Corners remain the only channel on offer: that is where Zwirbaum reads the answers.