-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yes, I agree that it makes more sence. But I believe Paradox sometime said that it was two.
Nevermind. This is better!
I might have to add a cruiser then. I'll go look...
Edit: nope..
Nevermind. This is better!
I might have to add a cruiser then. I'll go look...Edit: nope..
Last edited:
Do it here
If it's about naval tech then be aware that there is an event for USSR naval design programme.
Re: Re: Soviet OOB and models
Cheers
We have agreed upon using the english transcryption of russian language, not the english translation. Thus you should use Iosif Stalin (IS), not Joseph Stalin (JS).
Cheers
Re: Re: Re: Soviet OOB and models
To go on with my Soviet project I would like to add some more tech to the country.csv, and change the 'USSR Naval Programme' events a bit.
IMO SOV should start with the folowing tech:
1. Airborne tech.
9201 'Gliders', 9202 'Airborne Glider Training' and 9203 'Paratroppers'.
As you probably are aware, the SOV was the first country to develop and put large Airborne units into practice. In 1935 they airlifted 14.000 men from Moscow to Vladivostok, and by '36 several brigades of Airborne tropps had been formed. So an Airborne Division should also be added to the OOB, along with a transport I suppose.
Link 1 Link 2
2. Naval tech.
SOV wasn't that far behind in naval technology by '36 as CORE implies. Their navy was relativly small though, and they definetly didn't have the naval doctrines (strategical thinking) that other nations possesed.
Their designs were however not that bad. The Maxim Gor'kiy-class heavy cruiser seems to fit the description for a Treaty Heavy Cruiser, and the Krasni Kavkaz-class a Treaty Light Cruiser. The Maxim Gor'kys were laid down in 1937, but the two Kirov-class cruisers (wich was pretty much the same ship) was laid down in 1935. Another thing for the OOB...
I suggest that we give them the tech for 1500 Ton DD:s, Treaty Light Cruisers and Treaty Heavy Cruisers. I should be the following:
6400 #Improved Ship Building
6517 6518 6519 6521 6522 6529 6531 6532 6612 6613 6614
I have left out 'Carrier Experimentation', and 'Washington Treaty Designs'. They could be added in the Programme instead.
I also think that 6208 and 6209 should be removed. SOV never built ships like that (Battle Cruiser and Super-Dreadnaught). But they need to be added in the programme then (it was quite a kickstart for Soviet naval development).
3. USSR Naval Programme
This programme was immense. Stalin made the strategic decision to build a powerfull navy, and if WWII hadn't gotten in his way he probably would have. This site takes you through the whole programme (it's in French though, but it can be babelfished), and Admiral Kuznetsovs memoirs have some info to. It's also pretty good reading if you want the HOI timeframe from a different perspective (his stay in Spain is quite interesting)
Anyway, the programme should give SOV Post Treaty BB, Post Treaty Light Cruiser, Large Battlecruiser and 2000 Ton DD.
That is a LOT of tech. But before I post it, how about some feedback...
'IS' it is.
To go on with my Soviet project
I would like to add some more tech to the country.csv, and change the 'USSR Naval Programme' events a bit.IMO SOV should start with the folowing tech:
1. Airborne tech.
9201 'Gliders', 9202 'Airborne Glider Training' and 9203 'Paratroppers'.
As you probably are aware, the SOV was the first country to develop and put large Airborne units into practice. In 1935 they airlifted 14.000 men from Moscow to Vladivostok, and by '36 several brigades of Airborne tropps had been formed. So an Airborne Division should also be added to the OOB, along with a transport I suppose.
Link 1 Link 2
2. Naval tech.
SOV wasn't that far behind in naval technology by '36 as CORE implies. Their navy was relativly small though, and they definetly didn't have the naval doctrines (strategical thinking) that other nations possesed.
Their designs were however not that bad. The Maxim Gor'kiy-class heavy cruiser seems to fit the description for a Treaty Heavy Cruiser, and the Krasni Kavkaz-class a Treaty Light Cruiser. The Maxim Gor'kys were laid down in 1937, but the two Kirov-class cruisers (wich was pretty much the same ship) was laid down in 1935. Another thing for the OOB...
I suggest that we give them the tech for 1500 Ton DD:s, Treaty Light Cruisers and Treaty Heavy Cruisers. I should be the following:
6400 #Improved Ship Building
6517 6518 6519 6521 6522 6529 6531 6532 6612 6613 6614
I have left out 'Carrier Experimentation', and 'Washington Treaty Designs'. They could be added in the Programme instead.
I also think that 6208 and 6209 should be removed. SOV never built ships like that (Battle Cruiser and Super-Dreadnaught). But they need to be added in the programme then (it was quite a kickstart for Soviet naval development
).3. USSR Naval Programme
This programme was immense. Stalin made the strategic decision to build a powerfull navy, and if WWII hadn't gotten in his way he probably would have. This site takes you through the whole programme (it's in French though, but it can be babelfished), and Admiral Kuznetsovs memoirs have some info to. It's also pretty good reading if you want the HOI timeframe from a different perspective (his stay in Spain is quite interesting
)Anyway, the programme should give SOV Post Treaty BB, Post Treaty Light Cruiser, Large Battlecruiser and 2000 Ton DD.
That is a LOT of tech. But before I post it, how about some feedback...
Re: Re: Soviet OOB and models
Smart guy, huh?
I suggest:
MODEL_SOV_4_34;IS-1 (90mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (90+mm)
MODEL_SOV_4_35;IS-2 (100mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (100+mm)
MODEL_SOV_4_36;IS-3 (122mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (122+mm A)
MODEL_SOV_4_37;T-10 (122mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (122+mm
That more realistic version - or instead of IS-1 we can use T-44, the fact than IRL T-44 was never used in large number shouldn't limit us.
It's HoI, alternative timeline!
Of course we could use more info from this site , but IMO those models fits right.
About starting techs - I decided to limit para techs in USSR to avoid loss of balace. In most of my hands off games Soviet AI develops them anyway (in CORE no Nylon is needed to create basic Para div) and around 1941 they have 5-6 divisions (quite historical if we count SOV para corp as a division). Now, when paras are balanced by long loading time we can give them that.
Navy... Current version of Naval Programme event gives them Treaty Battleship. And they get 14 techs in this event! Maybe if we change stating level of RKKF, then it will be less, but again, you suggest post-treaty designs... Can't be done - we would have to give them another 2 levels and a lot of techs for free (ok, for some resources and IC). No idea how it could be modeled without losing balance.
Smart guy, huh?
I suggest:
MODEL_SOV_4_34;IS-1 (90mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (90+mm)
MODEL_SOV_4_35;IS-2 (100mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (100+mm)
MODEL_SOV_4_36;IS-3 (122mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (122+mm A)
MODEL_SOV_4_37;T-10 (122mm);;;;;;;;;;x #Post-War (122+mm
That more realistic version - or instead of IS-1 we can use T-44, the fact than IRL T-44 was never used in large number shouldn't limit us.
It's HoI, alternative timeline!
Of course we could use more info from this site , but IMO those models fits right.
About starting techs - I decided to limit para techs in USSR to avoid loss of balace. In most of my hands off games Soviet AI develops them anyway (in CORE no Nylon is needed to create basic Para div) and around 1941 they have 5-6 divisions (quite historical if we count SOV para corp as a division). Now, when paras are balanced by long loading time we can give them that.
Navy... Current version of Naval Programme event gives them Treaty Battleship. And they get 14 techs in this event!
Maybe if we change stating level of RKKF, then it will be less, but again, you suggest post-treaty designs... Can't be done - we would have to give them another 2 levels and a lot of techs for free (ok, for some resources and IC). No idea how it could be modeled without losing balance.
Ok, I'll add the T-44 .
About the Naval Programme. I have looked at the ships being built for it, and they pretty much fit the models I proposed.
Sovyetskiy Soyuz-class. This was the monster BB they were buliding. Leans more towards Super BB, and is definetly a Post Treaty BB.
Chapayev-class. Seems to be a Post Treaty Light CA.
Kronshtadt-class. Large Battlecruiser.
The Storozhevoy and the Osmotritelny-class DD:s that were built for the programme, should give the 2000 ton DD class.
Off-course, these are my estimates. Perhaps they are in-accurate. Decide yourselfs.
I do think that this should cost them (as it did historically). Perhaps double the resource cost to 30.000 of each and double the permament loss of IC to 10?
But my striking point in all this is that no Russian player (exept for on the easyiest diff level) will ever be able to build this fleet if there is a German attack (and believe me, I have tried it many times). Just like in real-life. The take up to many resources just like they did for Stalin, and other units will have to be prioritised. So I don't think that it will screw up the balance.
The Programme will however add historical truth and accuracy. And some flair..
.About the Naval Programme. I have looked at the ships being built for it, and they pretty much fit the models I proposed.
Sovyetskiy Soyuz-class. This was the monster BB they were buliding. Leans more towards Super BB, and is definetly a Post Treaty BB.
Chapayev-class. Seems to be a Post Treaty Light CA.
Kronshtadt-class. Large Battlecruiser.
The Storozhevoy and the Osmotritelny-class DD:s that were built for the programme, should give the 2000 ton DD class.
Off-course, these are my estimates. Perhaps they are in-accurate. Decide yourselfs.
I do think that this should cost them (as it did historically). Perhaps double the resource cost to 30.000 of each and double the permament loss of IC to 10?
But my striking point in all this is that no Russian player (exept for on the easyiest diff level) will ever be able to build this fleet if there is a German attack (and believe me, I have tried it many times). Just like in real-life. The take up to many resources just like they did for Stalin, and other units will have to be prioritised. So I don't think that it will screw up the balance.
The Programme will however add historical truth and accuracy. And some flair..
Originally posted by barrabas
But my striking point in all this is that no Russian player (exept for on the easyiest diff level) will ever be able to build this fleet if there is a German attack (and believe me, I have tried it many times). Just like in real-life. The take up to many resources just like they did for Stalin, and other units will have to be prioritised. So I don't think that it will screw up the balance.
The Programme will however add historical truth and accuracy. And some flair..
There is also one russian player, quite important - AI. Right now AI looses stand off gmaes 100% of the time. We can't rise the cost of programme much more, because it will make AI even more likely to collapse. On the other hand, we cant give over 20 techs to plaer for free - most playters is able to deal with Germany to the end of 1942, then they have full pack of naval tech, all IC of Europe... a bit too good, IMO.
Caucasus terrain changes
The Caucasus in southern USSR is cut in half by the transcaucasus mountain range peaked by Mount Albruz.
In the 40's, there were very few passes and the ones that were there were pretty well defended, although a lot less then Stalin wanted Churchill to believe.
Is there a possibility to restrict (or make travel time so long) the use of motorized divisions there?
The Germans brought in special mountain divisions but were never able to breach the range.
I accept that there was a road next to the black sea, but HOI doesn't simulate roads blocked by army groups etc, and to simulate the special problems, I suggest that those provinces become real true mountains, breachable by mountain troops but with great effort.
This might have the USSR actually surviving, because they keep the oil etc.
The Caucasus in southern USSR is cut in half by the transcaucasus mountain range peaked by Mount Albruz.
In the 40's, there were very few passes and the ones that were there were pretty well defended, although a lot less then Stalin wanted Churchill to believe.
Is there a possibility to restrict (or make travel time so long) the use of motorized divisions there?
The Germans brought in special mountain divisions but were never able to breach the range.
I accept that there was a road next to the black sea, but HOI doesn't simulate roads blocked by army groups etc, and to simulate the special problems, I suggest that those provinces become real true mountains, breachable by mountain troops but with great effort.
This might have the USSR actually surviving, because they keep the oil etc.
Good points. But I don't think that the resource loss will cripple them, after all this is early in the game, SOV will get back that coal, oil and steel within a year probably.
And the 10 IC:s won't make much difference. After all, once the war starts, SOV IC is down to 30-50% due to lack of resources.
Your human player-point is however harder to counter
. I agree that it might be a bit to good. What if we give them most of the tech, but leave some essential things (guns, actual designs) for the player to research. A bit like the first version we did of the event.We will off-course only give them the esential. Nothing extra at all (wich means that other navys will still have a qualitive edge). And don't forget all the doctrines the SOV player have to research in order to make his fleet usefull.
I think I had one more point, but I seem to have forgotten it...
Edit: Now I remember. Germany starts with Post Treaty BB. I'm not saying this is ahistorical, I wouldn't know. But it implies (IMO
) that giving this tech to SOV some years later (wich is historical), wouldn't be that unbalancing...
Last edited:
Well... no. When the war starts, Great Patriotic War doctrine "kicks in", and it gives SOV 25% rise of IC effectiveness. Sadly it also means 25% higher use of resources - SOV is drained of those after 1 year of defence. I work now on the event chain giving them steel and supplies too keep them fighting (it will be, guess what... Lend Lease!
).It's 10IC lost before the war, when they really need it to upgrade their army to T-34/Mig-3/Il-2 standards. When the war starts they simply stop researching - resources (see above).
Originally posted by barrabas
Your human player-point is however harder to counter
Well, maybe simply check the tree, post what do you think SOV should get from the start, then we will try to make the new version of the event. And guns are the easiest part - MDow created really complex tree, and now BB is much, much more than armor, hull and guns.
Historical, they started building Bismarck and Tirpitz 1935/1936. It took them quite a time, but if those were not post-treaty, then which BB's were?
Avtomat Kalashnikova
Historically, although Germans fielded the first assault rifle -- Sturmgewehr 44, USSR did not introduce their assault rifle until well after the war. The first model fielded was the famous AK-47, Avtomat Kalashnikova, model 1947.
Performance-wise this weapon was definitely superior to StG-44 and IMHO can and should be considered an "Improved Assault Rifle." The later modification, AKM did not change the weapon's performance noticeably but merely improved the production process.
I propose adding an event, which would immediately give the USSR the "Improved Assault Rifle" technology upon researching the "Basic Assault Rifle"
What do you think?
Historically, although Germans fielded the first assault rifle -- Sturmgewehr 44, USSR did not introduce their assault rifle until well after the war. The first model fielded was the famous AK-47, Avtomat Kalashnikova, model 1947.
Performance-wise this weapon was definitely superior to StG-44 and IMHO can and should be considered an "Improved Assault Rifle." The later modification, AKM did not change the weapon's performance noticeably but merely improved the production process.
I propose adding an event, which would immediately give the USSR the "Improved Assault Rifle" technology upon researching the "Basic Assault Rifle"
What do you think?
Russian Naval Technology
Here are my thoughts when I was putting together the Russian OOB and tech...
Sovyetskiy Soyuz class battleships-
These were basically modified Italian Vittorio class battleships designed to take into account differing priorities in design. The had practically the same main armament, the 28 kt speed and armor protection. They were layed down in 1938. These ships were laid down after extensive advice for Italian designers and incorperated an Italian protection scheme. Russia did not have the ability to build these battleships without outside design help. Gibbs and Cox (an American firm) was asked for design help around the same time period but wasn't allowed to participate because of restrictions placed on them by the US government.
Krasny Krim class light cruisers-
These are traditional WWI era cruisers. 15x5.1 guns laid out in 15 single mounts. They were actually slower than their foreign counterparts.
Krazy Kavkaz vs Kirov
The Kavakaz only had four 7" guns. The standard treaty cruiser had at least double that amount. They were slower than their foreign counterparts and didn't even have as much armor as the famously underarmored US Northampton class cruisers. The Kriov completed three years later was the first design that matched foreign ships in speed, armament, and protection. She more than doubled the number of main battery guns, doubled the thickness of the belt armor and added 6 kts of speed. Not really like designs.
Storozhevoy (sp?) class destoryers-
These are listed as Silny class in the data sheets that the game uses. They are 2500 ton destroyers in terms of name. IRL the Silny (Type-7U) class destroyers were 1600 ton destroyers armed with 4 5.1" guns. This is comperable to the US Livermore class that was being about the same time. Russia completed their first 1500 ton destroyer (Type 7 class) in 1937. Before that all of their contruction had been WWI standard.
As for starting technology, I am willing to listen. I have seen no evidence that Russia was doing any experimentation with carriers or seaborne aircraft (6300 level techs) or had done any work with high pressure steam systems, advanced hull forms, advanced torpedo designs, or advanced fire control systems which are the the techs that are required for the Washington Treaty designs that were being built by other countries in that time period. MDow
Here are my thoughts when I was putting together the Russian OOB and tech...
Sovyetskiy Soyuz class battleships-
These were basically modified Italian Vittorio class battleships designed to take into account differing priorities in design. The had practically the same main armament, the 28 kt speed and armor protection. They were layed down in 1938. These ships were laid down after extensive advice for Italian designers and incorperated an Italian protection scheme. Russia did not have the ability to build these battleships without outside design help. Gibbs and Cox (an American firm) was asked for design help around the same time period but wasn't allowed to participate because of restrictions placed on them by the US government.
Krasny Krim class light cruisers-
These are traditional WWI era cruisers. 15x5.1 guns laid out in 15 single mounts. They were actually slower than their foreign counterparts.
Krazy Kavkaz vs Kirov
The Kavakaz only had four 7" guns. The standard treaty cruiser had at least double that amount. They were slower than their foreign counterparts and didn't even have as much armor as the famously underarmored US Northampton class cruisers. The Kriov completed three years later was the first design that matched foreign ships in speed, armament, and protection. She more than doubled the number of main battery guns, doubled the thickness of the belt armor and added 6 kts of speed. Not really like designs.
Storozhevoy (sp?) class destoryers-
These are listed as Silny class in the data sheets that the game uses. They are 2500 ton destroyers in terms of name. IRL the Silny (Type-7U) class destroyers were 1600 ton destroyers armed with 4 5.1" guns. This is comperable to the US Livermore class that was being about the same time. Russia completed their first 1500 ton destroyer (Type 7 class) in 1937. Before that all of their contruction had been WWI standard.
As for starting technology, I am willing to listen. I have seen no evidence that Russia was doing any experimentation with carriers or seaborne aircraft (6300 level techs) or had done any work with high pressure steam systems, advanced hull forms, advanced torpedo designs, or advanced fire control systems which are the the techs that are required for the Washington Treaty designs that were being built by other countries in that time period. MDow
Re: Avtomat Kalashnikova
I try to minimalize sitiuations, when technology is given "for free". Soon someone will suggest, that Germans should have turbojet engine from the start, or given in the event in 1937. Or Me-262 in 1942.
Bear in mind, that Imp. Assault Rifle automatically improves all units stats, when AK was introduced to the units for quite a time. Technology in HoI means not only project, but in most cases implementation. AK and AKM were fully implemented in USSR in second half of 50-ties.
I try to minimalize sitiuations, when technology is given "for free". Soon someone will suggest, that Germans should have turbojet engine from the start, or given in the event in 1937. Or Me-262 in 1942.
Bear in mind, that Imp. Assault Rifle automatically improves all units stats, when AK was introduced to the units for quite a time. Technology in HoI means not only project, but in most cases implementation. AK and AKM were fully implemented in USSR in second half of 50-ties.
Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Well... no. When the war starts, Great Patriotic War doctrine "kicks in", and it gives SOV 25% rise of IC effectiveness. Sadly it also means 25% higher use of resources - SOV is drained of those after 1 year of defence. I work now on the event chain giving them steel and supplies too keep them fighting (it will be, guess what... Lend Lease!
Hi Copper
You are going to make these lend lease events ai only, right?
after all, player USSR does'nt get patriotic war.
Ghost_dk
Nope, those events will be available to human players. IMO will add some flavor to rather event-less Eastern Front.
If I wanted simply help AI, I would create AI_event giving them 99999 of everything at once.
Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Nope, those events will be available to human players. IMO will add some flavor to rather event-less Eastern Front.
If I wanted simply help AI, I would create AI_event giving them 99999 of everything at once.
well in that case I think you should make 2 sets of events as the human player will not need as many extra resources(they dont get a 25% increase through patriotic war.)
IMO the events should also only trigger if USSR has harbors where the goods can arrive. (murmansk, vladivostok, maybe others?)
IF they are in axis control they cannot get lend lease
Ghost_dk
You mean 80 events instead of 40?
But you are right, I'll make 1/2 events ai=yes.Yeap, Murmansk, Archangielsk, Komsomolsk na Amurie, persian ports... What's more, if Germans got Narvik, only 50% of Murmansk convoys will reach their destination, and when US is at war with Japan Pacific Route is closed.
Last edited:
Originally posted by Copper Nicus
You mean 80 events instead of 40?
Yeap, Murmansk, Archangielsk, Komsomolsk na Amurie, persian ports... What's more, if Germans got Narvik, only 50% of Murmansk convoys will reach their destination, and when US is war with Japan Pacific Route is closed.
exellent
Ghost_dk
Will do!Originally posted by Copper Nicus
[...] Well, maybe simply check the tree, post what do you think SOV should get from the start, then we will try to make the new version of the event. And guns are the easiest part - MDow created really complex tree, and now BB is much, much more than armor, hull and guns.