C.O.R.E. Tech Tree: Land units, techs and doctrines

[Steel]

Re: Re: Re: Update...

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Sinkiang fights back, but stays in it's borders - it's ok.
Full list of changes is in readme file, check it. If you need more info, just mail me.
This is probably the last release before adding it into regular CORE - at the end of the week I'll post you final files.

I'm a bit concerned by the lack of feedback - but obviously all testers enjoy game so much that they got no time to post.

Sounds good, I'm looking forward to seeing C.O.R.E. as one package. That will make it a bit more meaningful to run test games as well, right now (despite my intention to focus on TechMod) I've had to focus on the hang problem. Hopefully that's behind us now though

Generalisimo, if you don't have time to do testing now can you email me the test fixes for the alliance switching events that lead to Allies joining the Axis? I'll run test games and publish a hot fix, it would *really* help reduce the support problems even if the fixes are only good for most cases.

 

[Generalisimo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Update...

Originally posted by Steel
Sounds good, I'm looking forward to seeing C.O.R.E. as one package. That will make it a bit more meaningful to run test games as well, right now (despite my intention to focus on TechMod) I've had to focus on the hang problem. Hopefully that's behind us now though

Generalisimo, if you don't have time to do testing now can you email me the test fixes for the alliance switching events that lead to Allies joining the Axis? I'll run test games and publish a hot fix, it would *really* help reduce the support problems even if the fixes are only good for most cases.

yes, i was adding all the things to email you that (so you have more to test).

 

[MateDow]

Tester feedback

I have been focusing on naval stuff, so I have fallen about 2 versions behind the top of the line, but so far it appears to be working well and realistic. I like the way armor works in here and the fact that cavalry has a chance to improve with the rest of the army. Hopefully that helps. MDow

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Re: Tester feedback

Originally posted by MateDow
I have been focusing on naval stuff, so I have fallen about 2 versions behind the top of the line, but so far it appears to be working well and realistic. I like the way armor works in here and the fact that cavalry has a chance to improve with the rest of the army. Hopefully that helps. MDow

Good to know.
I'm still going to rewrite weather/night/terrain bonuses from techs (at the end of war (1946?) units might fight better at night then during the day time - total nonsense) and add some techs Shepp included in 5 version of techmod (shaped charges, HEAT ammo). For now I dumped these (including links to the naval techs), but I will include them back after lowering some tank stats (to balance things).
All at all I want to end it fast and go back to events writing (not to mention exams and lots of work)...

 

[Ghost_dk]

Hi gang

just tested the latest version of the techtree. Nice work. i have a couple of small but's though.

1) there is a typo in the forced air boiler description. first line reads forcing are(should be air)

2) the great war experiance, convoy test or something should IMO be a pre-requisite of the naval doctrine, Sea Lanes as it is a further development of this.

3) Why is superheavy tank still a seperate model when heavy tank has been taken out?

love the increased supplies consumption allthough it puts a strain on my german development plan Oh well, back to square one.

Any chance of implementing some of Math Guys thoughts on how to make armor and mechs take higher losses(greather hard attack values for many units) Ill add the link when i find it again.

Ghost_dk

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
1) there is a typo in the forced air boiler description. first line reads forcing are(should be air)

Ok, will correct it.

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
2) the great war experiance, convoy test or something should IMO be a pre-requisite of the naval doctrine, Sea Lanes as it is a further development of this.

I'll check it...

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
3) Why is superheavy tank still a seperate model when heavy tank has been taken out?

I know, it's a flaw - but in test games, when I made supertanks bonus to standard divisions I had no good way to handle it - those tanks would seriously lower speed of EVERY new tank unit. It would make those units virtually unplayable - I decided, that supertanks will stay, will be tough as hell (but not from the air...) but virtually stationary. I'm still trying to find better solution though...

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
love the increased supplies consumption allthough it puts a strain on my german development plan Oh well, back to square one.

He, he - that's the point. But AI handles it quite good, so probably most of the players would not notice the problem.
BTW, did you tried to build units with AT/AA/ART brigades? These units got quite a punch now...

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
Any chance of implementing some of Math Guys thoughts on how to make armor and mechs take higher losses(greather hard attack values for many units) Ill add the link when i find it again.

Yes, I was thinking about it. Maybe in next version - I'm still not too sure, if AI would be able to handle it. For now hard attack is higher in most of the units, also infantry got much higher defence, and early tanks are really crappy - so it's better than in vanilla HoI.

 

[Ghost_dk]

Originally posted by Copper Nicus

Yes, I was thinking about it. Maybe in next version - I'm still not too sure, if AI would be able to handle it. For now hard attack is higher in most of the units, also infantry got much higher defence, and early tanks are really crappy - so it's better than in vanilla HoI.

Actually I think the AI will do better then most players to begin with because they allready place their armor and mech units with inf as was the case in reallity. The real problem will be for the players who are used to being able to crush everything with their 12 stack units of armor or mech. Now they would see their supplies dissapear very fast and they would have to constantly stop their advances to reorganize.

Ghost_DK

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
Actually I think the AI will do better then most players to begin with because they allready place their armor and mech units with inf as was the case in reallity. The real problem will be for the players who are used to being able to crush everything with their 12 stack units of armor or mech. Now they would see their supplies dissapear very fast and they would have to constantly stop their advances to reorganize.

Ghost_DK

From the start players would be a bit suprised, that getting even Pz. IV F2 in 1939 is extremely hard (it's possible, but when you know how... ) and would start the war with Pz. IV D... Then they will find out that when they were inventing flashy toys enemy was building large number of divisions, many of them with effective artillery and AT brigades...
I don't say that game will be radically harder, but for sure it would be something new for most of the players (well, knowledge of MKShepp's techmod would help...).

 

[Ghost_dk]

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
would start the war with Pz. IV D... Then they will find out that when they were inventing flashy toys enemy was building large number of divisions, many of them with effective artillery and AT brigades...

Actually i think that this is a big step in making russia as hard as it should be Ups i have 150 division russia has 450. No problem earlier but now hehe

Actually i think with the upgrade industry and build vanilla inf aproach that i often use with russia and the new patriotic war doc for russia i might be able to push russia to some 600-700 divs by 40. Bring them on

Ghost_dk

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
Actually i think that this is a big step in making russia as hard as it should be Ups i have 150 division russia has 450. No problem earlier but now hehe

Ghost_dk

In my games Russia never had more than 360. Go for the fast kill, because later it could be only worse...

EDIT:
This doctrine is AI only - in hands of human it would make USSR totally unstopable.

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Update...

Ok, this is the last release before merging techmod with basic CORE.

basic pack 0.29 (approx. 560 KB)

graphics pack (approx. 2 MB)

Changes since 0.28:

- difficulty level events corrected,
- first pack (30 events - GER) of Hard_core events added,
- # 172034 - Spanish Civil War: an important experience modified - Germany gets lower level of land doctrine,
- USA ai nuclear resarch corrected (it's faster),
- UK ai modified (now defends Belfast),
- artillery techs shaped charges added,
- lowered hard attack values of advanced tank units,
- table with units statistics added,
- corrected costs of German BB's and Cruisers in development,
- corrected names in models.csv file.

Enjoy!

 

[Steel]

Downloaded, will try to check it out later today. Hopefully there shouldn't be too much support needed for the v0.3 release, it is completely stable here Overnight games completed ok, one Allied victory (!) and one Axis victory. A third game is in August 1945 right now with USSR moving in on Konigsberg and bombing Romania (who is holding a strong front against them).

Note that there was some additional changes in the v0.3 AI files. It should be fairly easy to identify based on datestamp.

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Looks great!
Important thing to know when you start merging it - I did not add any changes added to CORE between 0.21 and 0.3 (even my own events). So there change in USSR AI (Stalin's Line) will be needed, as well Bohr events AI's and all the new stuff.

 

[Steel]

Ok, I've now got it installed and had a quick look. Can you confirm the only change in the *.inc files is the starting techs? I'll copy it across to the v0.3 files which has a few OOB changes and strat_redeploy changes.


The TechMod sikiang.ai is instructed to build airforce and ships... Take a look at sinkiang.ai that came with v0.3, suggest we use that instead. If I missed something that file let me know and I'll edit it in.


About the AI files in general, some are very much obsolete (not talking about your work, but about C.O.R.E. in general), they are not even close to what should be 1.04 standard. I'll review them today and try to see what work needs to be done, is it mainly just the UK, USSR and Germany files you've worked on?


Thanks for including the table of unit stats, looks good. Did you check to see if any of the tech changes might affect the events which grant tech? There's 13 event files in v0.3 which uses the gain_tech command...


I'm very much looking forward to the integrated version, there's a fair bit of work to be done but I think the end result will be very good


PS: The third game I mentioned before... it's now 1947, Germany pushed the USSR back to Vitebsk but seems to find it hard the Stalin line the AI built there. In the meantime the US has landed in Marseille and just doubled their forces holding it. An interesting game with many reversals of fortune

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Steel
Ok, I've now got it installed and had a quick look. Can you confirm the only change in the *.inc files is the starting techs? I'll copy it across to the v0.3 files which has a few OOB changes and strat_redeploy changes.

No, there is more - in case most of the modified files that would be DI, in some fortifications, and in all - naval OOB (some in case of Italy also land OOB - there was an id bug). All at all it would be better to copy other way around - puting things that was changed in 0.3 into my inc files.

Originally posted by Steel
The TechMod sikiang.ai is instructed to build airforce and ships... Take a look at sinkiang.ai that came with v0.3, suggest we use that instead. If I missed something that file let me know and I'll edit it in.

Ok, what's important is to keep passivity = 100.

Originally posted by Steel
About the AI files in general, some are very much obsolete (not talking about your work, but about C.O.R.E. in general), they are not even close to what should be 1.04 standard. I'll review them today and try to see what work needs to be done, is it mainly just the UK, USSR and Germany files you've worked on?

USA, USSR, a bit of UK, France and research priorities of Germany and Japan. Some minor changes in others. But I mostly worked on research and , had no time to correct other parameters (only ussr file was really tweaked, but it's mostly your version).

Originally posted by Steel
Thanks for including the table of unit stats, looks good. Did you check to see if any of the tech changes might affect the events which grant tech? There's 13 event files in v0.3 which uses the gain_tech command...

In 0.21 it was all checked, don't know 0.3 - but if those are not advanced tank techs or any naval techs, then it should work fine (only in those branches some techs were removed).

Originally posted by Steel
I'm very much looking forward to the integrated version, there's a fair bit of work to be done but I think the end result will be very good
PS: The third game I mentioned before... it's now 1947, Germany pushed the USSR back to Vitebsk but seems to find it hard the Stalin line the AI built there. In the meantime the US has landed in Marseille and just doubled their forces holding it. An interesting game with many reversals of fortune

Hmmm, seems like Soviets not removed existing forts? There was an event with destruction of the forts?

 

[Steel]

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
No, there is more - in case most of the modified files that would be DI, in some fortifications, and in all - naval OOB (some in case of Italy also land OOB - there was an id bug). All at all it would be better to copy other way around - puting things that was changed in 0.3 into my inc files.

You are of course right, I was taking rubbish Must be half asleep still, I've already started copying 0.3 => Techmod so I was at least doing the right thing while saying the wrong thing.

About the AI, wilco. About the tech, good - less work

Hmmm, seems like Soviets not removed existing forts? There was an event with destruction of the forts?

Never fired. Quick check of history.txt shows this was due to the Japanese DOWing USSR (there's an atwar trigger for the land_fort reduction event).

Anyway, Germany broke through six months later, isolated Leningrad and advanced past the Don Basin. Never got to Moscow though, all in all very historical but 4 years late Ended with Axis victory only 50 points ahead of Allies. I don't think the survival of the forts was a big deal, but it seems Germany is definitely not doing as well as in v0.2.

 

[Steel]

CORE_events.txt

CORE_events.txt differs as well, as far as I can tell it's just two new event files to be added. Correct?

#-----------------------------------------------------------
# Techmod C.O.R.E. events
#-----------------------------------------------------------

event = "scenarios\CORE_campaign\events\core_Tech.txt"

#-----------------------------------------------------------
# Hard C.O.R.E. events
#-----------------------------------------------------------
event = "scenarios\CORE_campaign\events\core_Hard.txt"


FYI I've updated your text.csv adding in about 80 hints. I don't think there was anything new in the v0.3 text.csv so that should be it for that file.

Give me another few hours and I'll send you an updated package with the integration changes I'm making.

 

[Steel]

Took out the 1285 claim from your ethiopia.inc file, it causes a CTD on end of Spanish civil war or on reload if Ethiopia has had their claim events fire (ie Italy defeated).


About germany.inc, there's a comment as follows:

### Germany OOB (Non-authentic) 1936 Author: PDX ###

Can somebody comment on this? Is it non-authentic for game balance reasons? I know it's present in regular C.O.R.E. as well so it's not a TechMod thing, I'd just like to know.

 

[Steel]

italy.inc

In TechMod italy.inc you have this:

navalunit = {
id = { type = 14000 id = 257 }
name = "Sommergibili Naviglio"
location = 893
leader = 6194 #Falangola

division = {
id = { type = 14000 id = 258 }
name = "4a Divisione Torpediniere"
type = destroyer
model = 1
}


In v0.3 C.O.R.E. that unit is a submarine squadron (along with 2 other sub squadrons in the Sommergibili Naviglio). Any reason for the change? I know it was DD squadron in the original OOB but named 4a Sommergibili... If there's a source that says Sommergibili Naviglio had a DD squardon then fine, otherwise I think it's better to keep it all subs (mixing is a really bad idea, guarantees destruction of DD squadron long before SS squadron loses org).

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Re: italy.inc

Originally posted by Steel
In TechMod italy.inc you have this:
(...)
In v0.3 C.O.R.E. that unit is a submarine squadron (along with 2 other sub squadrons in the Sommergibili Naviglio). Any reason for the change? I know it was DD squadron in the original OOB but named 4a Sommergibili... If there's a source that says Sommergibili Naviglio had a DD squardon then fine, otherwise I think it's better to keep it all subs (mixing is a really bad idea, guarantees destruction of DD squadron long before SS squadron loses org).

Didn't know about that bug - naval OOB's are simply cut and pasted from MDow's files - maybe he will have some clue?

Anyway, it's better to do it your way (separate DD from subs). Should I send you corrected file?

EDIT:
About CORE_events.txt - yes, these 2 lines are the only change.

About comment in germany.inc file - it probably refers to the fact, that German OOB in HoI in 1936 scenario was changed to keep the balance of game. At least that's my opinion.

More about AI's - it would be better if you check all the changes in superpowers and mayor nation AI differences between 0.3 and the techmod. In case of minors I didn't modified AI's really.