Steel said:
I know, but just trying to get a feel for where we are overall compared to v1.05c.
-
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.
I know, but just trying to get a feel for where we are overall compared to v1.05c.
Copper Nicus said:
Thanks, I have access to the wiki [thanks Steel!]. Not looking for the models.csv file, but rather, with all of the techs researched, what the unit values are. Just wondering if you have that handy to save lazy me the pain of going through all of the tech files and summing all the bonuses up.
There have been so many changes, i no longer have a feel for where we are compared to v1.05c: up, down, or sideways.
Last edited:
2Coats said:Paxmondo - Not that important, but Im not involved with developing C.O.R.E, just infuriatingly addicted to playing it!
I'm pretty much in the same category. i occasionally 'kibitz' a bit.
PaxMondo said:
I know what are you refering to - best source up to date is posted in the "website" thread (access it from the Home Page). There are no final values, but all the starting ones plus all the bonuses listed, so counting that will be much easier then in case of the "raw" game files.
So far I've posted air and tank unit "manuals" - when we finish the work on the infantry and artillery values, similar "manual", covering all the "soft units" will be posted.
Copper Nicus said:
Couldn't find the land unit values you referred to in that thread. Your armored manual though is really good. Couple of thoughts:
1. as you know, there are inf, arty, and land doctrines that effect the armored values as well. would be nice to somehow get those integrated into the manual so that you have a complete set of info.
2. maybe becasue of the level of interweave now, you really end up with 3 manuals: air, land, navl covering all of the units in each theatre. even then, you will still have crossing over as units like marines have upgrades in almost all of hte tech streams.
Thanks.
brigades consuming fuel
Copied from my post in Math Guy's HSP thread:
EDIT: just tested cavalry and engineer brigade modded to use fuel. Both behave as Mithel said the cavalry did: the unit information display and the oil stockpile mouseover text says it consumes fuel but NO OIL IS ACTUALLY USED.
EDIT2: Bug report now posted here.
Copied from my post in Math Guy's HSP thread:
Have you tested? According to Mithel (back on page 3):Maximilian I said:
Don't know if he used tech or the unit files but it shouldn't make a difference given the behavior he saw. C.O.R.E. adds fuel consumption to brigades though tech which I assume works although I haven't tested.Mithel said:
EDIT: just tested cavalry and engineer brigade modded to use fuel. Both behave as Mithel said the cavalry did: the unit information display and the oil stockpile mouseover text says it consumes fuel but NO OIL IS ACTUALLY USED.
EDIT2: Bug report now posted here.
Last edited:
Militia units
I was pawing through CORE last night, and the thought struck me.
It seems odd that things like a standard service rifle, standardization in general, and especially things like many of the doctrines don't effect militia units.
More and more, that makes them useless, and it especially makes AI-controlled countries like the Philippines (with the human as US) or similar useless (given that the Philippine army is mostly militia).
Techs I'm thinking should have a direct effect on Militia.
###Infantry Techs###
1300 # Combat Medical Service
1302 # Penicillin, DDT and Mepacrine
1303 # Blood Transfusions
1304 # Front-Line Medical Station
1305 # Bulldozer
1200 # Basic Infantry Weapons and Battlefield C3I
1201 # Semi-Automatic Rifle
1000 # Early Infantry Weapons
1001 # Light Mortar (50mm)
1975 # .30 Caliber HMG
1700 # Advanced Infantry Weapons
1701 # Improved Submachine gun
1702 # Basic Assault Rifle
1977 # Improved GPMG
1940 # Semi-Modern Infantry Weapons
1941 # Improved Assault Rifle
1942 # Personal Body Armor
1600 # Improved Logistics
1601 # Standardized Ammunition
1602 # Standardized Cargo Spaces
1603 # Refuel and Ammo Teams
1400 # Improved Infantry Weapons
1401 # Basic Submachine Gun
1976 # Basic General Purpose Machine Gun
1972 # Forward Observer Ground Bomber Directing
######### Reasons ##########
1. The above techs fit because of how militia can generally be concieved. As I understand it, the militia unit is supposed to represent people basically coming from home, given whatever's available in the local armory, organized into units, and sent off. Think Volkssturm, "Red Dawn"-ish kids with rifles, the Minutemen (of 1775; Yes, anachronistic, but the same idea), etc. The medical techs would be basically the local doctors organized into medical units and grabbing supplies from the local hospitals. Bulldozers? Honk honk. The union locals!
2. Re the weapons and body armor: I picked and chose, figuring on the classic American idea of the local National Guard Armory being broken open, or people pulling their guns from their closets. (The latter may be better represented by partisan events occurring on anybody entering one of the Western US provinces; Most people DID have guns back then, at least hunting rifles. Gun Control never really got off the ground til after WW2, as I understand it.)
3. FO Ground Bomber Directing: The classic literary trick of some guy on the ground using his cheapass radio, getting in contact with a friendly air unit, and directing in air strikes.
4. Service rifle: Not listed cuz I took that list from id_list.txt; However, it would seem to fit. As I understand it, the M1903 Springfield, for example, was not very different at all from most bolt-action rifles used by civilian shooters.
Now that I look at it, I can't think of any other possible techs, but these come most directly to mind.
I was pawing through CORE last night, and the thought struck me.
It seems odd that things like a standard service rifle, standardization in general, and especially things like many of the doctrines don't effect militia units.
More and more, that makes them useless, and it especially makes AI-controlled countries like the Philippines (with the human as US) or similar useless (given that the Philippine army is mostly militia).
Techs I'm thinking should have a direct effect on Militia.
###Infantry Techs###
1300 # Combat Medical Service
1302 # Penicillin, DDT and Mepacrine
1303 # Blood Transfusions
1304 # Front-Line Medical Station
1305 # Bulldozer
1200 # Basic Infantry Weapons and Battlefield C3I
1201 # Semi-Automatic Rifle
1000 # Early Infantry Weapons
1001 # Light Mortar (50mm)
1975 # .30 Caliber HMG
1700 # Advanced Infantry Weapons
1701 # Improved Submachine gun
1702 # Basic Assault Rifle
1977 # Improved GPMG
1940 # Semi-Modern Infantry Weapons
1941 # Improved Assault Rifle
1942 # Personal Body Armor
1600 # Improved Logistics
1601 # Standardized Ammunition
1602 # Standardized Cargo Spaces
1603 # Refuel and Ammo Teams
1400 # Improved Infantry Weapons
1401 # Basic Submachine Gun
1976 # Basic General Purpose Machine Gun
1972 # Forward Observer Ground Bomber Directing
######### Reasons ##########
1. The above techs fit because of how militia can generally be concieved. As I understand it, the militia unit is supposed to represent people basically coming from home, given whatever's available in the local armory, organized into units, and sent off. Think Volkssturm, "Red Dawn"-ish kids with rifles, the Minutemen (of 1775; Yes, anachronistic, but the same idea), etc. The medical techs would be basically the local doctors organized into medical units and grabbing supplies from the local hospitals. Bulldozers? Honk honk. The union locals!
2. Re the weapons and body armor: I picked and chose, figuring on the classic American idea of the local National Guard Armory being broken open, or people pulling their guns from their closets. (The latter may be better represented by partisan events occurring on anybody entering one of the Western US provinces; Most people DID have guns back then, at least hunting rifles. Gun Control never really got off the ground til after WW2, as I understand it.)
3. FO Ground Bomber Directing: The classic literary trick of some guy on the ground using his cheapass radio, getting in contact with a friendly air unit, and directing in air strikes.
4. Service rifle: Not listed cuz I took that list from id_list.txt; However, it would seem to fit. As I understand it, the M1903 Springfield, for example, was not very different at all from most bolt-action rifles used by civilian shooters.
Now that I look at it, I can't think of any other possible techs, but these come most directly to mind.
Penta said:
You would have to raise the IC cost of raising militia then. In real life you would basically have lavishly equipped units that suck.
I think you should be able to customize your divisions by "turning off" weapons that you don't want, thereby reducing the IC and supply costs of raising and maintaining them, at a reduction in combat power.
markpalm1 said:
I don't think the militia would have first line equipment. If you have all of this first line equipment sitting in a 'National Guard' warehouse something is wrong. For the most part, equipment in armories is second hand equipment that is no longer fit for frontline use. The militia would get the non-standardized rifle when the frontline units upgrade. When the frontline units get something better, that is when the militia gets their 'new' equipment. I believe that is how the tech tree is modeled. I also don't agree with the idea of militia units getting the benefits from equipment and such. Medical stations are specialized units that usually aren't attached to non-regular units.
Unfortunately, the program doesn't allow us to customize units. The closest we can come are things like Heavy Tank Battalions, but even these are attached to every new unit after it is researched. It just isn't possible at this time. Maybe the HoI gods will hear your plea and add it to the list for HoI2. MDow
Motorized Infantry
Has anyone else noticed how bad motorized infantry is? It has gotten to the point where I don't even build it becuase it isn't effective. I just wanted to rant for a moment and wonder if there is anything that we can do about it, or it is hardcoded. MDow
Has anyone else noticed how bad motorized infantry is? It has gotten to the point where I don't even build it becuase it isn't effective. I just wanted to rant for a moment and wonder if there is anything that we can do about it, or it is hardcoded. MDow
MateDow said:
In MDS we are turning it in Airmobile Infantry, and changing normal infnatry into mobile infantry, so i think you can change it
I don't think it's hardcoded, just a matter of the modifiers and combat values. Modifiers in CORE 0.64 are mostly the same as mech inf which means large attack penalties compared to infantry in mountain/hill/jungle/swamp but they don't have mech's advantage of hard target status. Not sure how the attack/defense/org compare after several years of tech upgrades.MateDow said:
The only complaint I have about militia is that they get few (basically none) defensive combat modifiers with research. Militia should benefit from service rifle and one of the assault rifle techs (not both).
And I would vote for only the techs of light mortar and standardized ammo (which means that they could get one of the supply increasing techs too- like .30 cal MG).
To compensate for this, service/assault rifle would increase militia time by 15 days. Or after a certain tech +1 IC.
Also for militia- perhaps a nation-specific tech for militia enhancement: something like "Militia Based Army"- for countries like Ethiopia, the Philippines, Nepal, Burma, et cetera. It would increase the combat values of their militia, but increase their time/supply consumption. It would be described as something like- "Many of the poorest nations had to rely on poorly trained militiamen to defend their sovereignty at the end of the 30's. These militia groups were better equipped than their counterparts in rich nations, but meant the neglect of infantry divisions in their lands."
Just a suggestion
And I would vote for only the techs of light mortar and standardized ammo (which means that they could get one of the supply increasing techs too- like .30 cal MG).
To compensate for this, service/assault rifle would increase militia time by 15 days. Or after a certain tech +1 IC.
Also for militia- perhaps a nation-specific tech for militia enhancement: something like "Militia Based Army"- for countries like Ethiopia, the Philippines, Nepal, Burma, et cetera. It would increase the combat values of their militia, but increase their time/supply consumption. It would be described as something like- "Many of the poorest nations had to rely on poorly trained militiamen to defend their sovereignty at the end of the 30's. These militia groups were better equipped than their counterparts in rich nations, but meant the neglect of infantry divisions in their lands."
Just a suggestion
You will be finding that in 0.7 Motorized Infantry paralell regular Infantry very well, and in some cases can become superior.
The main problem with motorized infantry use is that players often think of this unit as 'better infantry' while it's only 'faster infantry'.
The other problem is that motorized infantry, when mixed with tank divisions, takes bigger part of the hits (working as a 'shield' for the tank units). It's probably something in code that makes 'soft' target hit first.
I still find the use for motorized infantry as fast and cheap units, able to fill a gap after the panzer blitz. In some cases motorized units can also serve as the assault units, if the enemy is not too strong.
All at all, do we really want to make motorized seriously better then infantry unit? It's true that motorized units are often mentioned in WW II literature as very effective, but main factor of that effectiveness is that they were in place, when needed (mobility).
The other problem is that motorized infantry, when mixed with tank divisions, takes bigger part of the hits (working as a 'shield' for the tank units). It's probably something in code that makes 'soft' target hit first.
I still find the use for motorized infantry as fast and cheap units, able to fill a gap after the panzer blitz. In some cases motorized units can also serve as the assault units, if the enemy is not too strong.
All at all, do we really want to make motorized seriously better then infantry unit? It's true that motorized units are often mentioned in WW II literature as very effective, but main factor of that effectiveness is that they were in place, when needed (mobility).
Motorized Infantry primarily takes their stats from the same places that regular Infantry does in the tech tree. However, there might be some leftovers from the original Vanilla HoI, which primarily had Motorized Infantry gain its statistics in the same areas that Mechanized Infantry did (i.e., a lot of armour tech). This is why the game may still have higher stats for Motorized Infantry. Realistically, all that they should be are Infantry with trucks.
Junkyard_Pope said:
Militia should not be a unit, it should be an improvement like AA or infrastructure. Provinces with the militia improvement would liberate unless garrisoned when occupied.
markpalm1 said:
Militia in HOI isn't a unit formed by "uprising citizens", but a military formation made up men with an average age >50 or <16, with few MG, automatic rifles or other advanced toys!
Or various units of territorial defence, border guards, police-formed divisions and so on.Pkunzipper said:
Cheers
Halibutt said:
I just don't see these boys with toys moving much beyond their own sandbox.