• 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.
Originally posted by Szun
What I did look up again was penetration of tigergun and pathergun (look in my sig its all there) 75L70 had more then the 88L56, the SU 76.2L42.5 (I think that is correct but not 100% sure) Had by far not the power of either.

You are correct here. The Panther's gun was simply frightening, second in the German tank gun armoury (of those that saw significant combat) only to the long 88 of the heavy tank destroyers and King Tiger, and quite superior to T-34 models prior to the T-34/85, which was close but not quite as deadly. Combine that with the superb speed of the Panther, and if properly handled to keep its side and top armour from main gun fire--simple enough in retreat except under air attack--advancing against it was a costly proposition.

The first time I was playing as Germany and saw improved medium tanks with the long 70mm+ gun, I drooled. What a mess.

jkk
 
Hehe:)

Did u read HItlers coment on a Tigerbattalion?

He said: a Tigerbattalion is worth a Panzerdivion

Main reason for that, Allied troops feared Tigers over anything else and Moral was high with tigers on the german side.
Even if the Panther had the better gun and frontarmor he never got the 'Tiger' status.

p.s. the 88 long sucked
The barrell was so long that it would deform from the weight,
In my eyes the kingtiger wasnt as good overall as the Tiger I E.
They should have worked the Tiger I up with angled armor and keep the working design.
Guderian insisted that the PzIV was still produced because of the relieability of the tank, same goes for tiger, it was out of the early age and the consept was working.
 
Last edited:
10/360 change

Seems fine to me, and the suggestion of more balanced ratios for R&D is valid as well.

In case of mayor-mayor (USA, USSR, GER, UK) nations, simple drop of the highest priorities to the level only 1 point above the rest of the list should be fine (but techs totally ignored, with 0.1 should probably stay as they are), while in case of mayor-minors we should simply double (or add 1-2) number of the branches that got focus on them.

In case of smaller nations, we should simply go for 1-2 more tech branches with focus on them.

There is still "doctrines case" to solve... :D
 
Copper, it's time for me to make another pilgrimage to the Sacred Tech Tree Arbour of the First Church of Hearts of Iron Technology Modification.

*much bowing, cringing and scraping, precisely as custom demands*

I understand the need to have Great War Tank, and the techs that precede it (Early Gear/Suspension/Engine). For some countries in 1936, those would be a big step. I can understand why you don't have to actually develop the Great War Tank to move on to the Basic Gear/Suspension/Engine/Tankette level. But wouldn't one need to at least have Early Gear, for example, for Basic Gear? And the same with the other two?

jkk
 
Originally posted by jkkelley
Copper, it's time for me to make another pilgrimage to the Sacred Tech Tree Arbour of the First Church of Hearts of Iron Technology Modification.

*much bowing, cringing and scraping, precisely as custom demands*

I understand the need to have Great War Tank, and the techs that precede it (Early Gear/Suspension/Engine). For some countries in 1936, those would be a big step. I can understand why you don't have to actually develop the Great War Tank to move on to the Basic Gear/Suspension/Engine/Tankette level. But wouldn't one need to at least have Early Gear, for example, for Basic Gear? And the same with the other two?

jkk

O, humbly pilgrim, I'll attend thy pleas...

Those parts of mighty war machine (St. Tank of Antiochia...) are connected in Early/Basic/Improved fashion in the file posted on blessed wiki forum in Bug section...

:D

Patch 6.2 should sort that out. :)
 
roflmao @JKK and Copper

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Seems fine to me, and the suggestion of more balanced ratios for R&D is valid as well.

In case of mayor-mayor (USA, USSR, GER, UK) nations, simple drop of the highest priorities to the level only 1 point above the rest of the list should be fine (but techs totally ignored, with 0.1 should probably stay as they are), while in case of mayor-minors we should simply double (or add 1-2) number of the branches that got focus on them.

In case of smaller nations, we should simply go for 1-2 more tech branches with focus on them.

There is still "doctrines case" to solve... :D
yes the docsection gives me a headacke too. very low cost long researchtime was a either to short in time or to low in cost or both.
In short it didnt work out.


to JKK, I was thinking the same when I looked at basic gear, imp gear, adv. gear etc. but never thought about it when posting. early should be prereq of basic and so forth...
ah and tankgun 70 short should be prereq of tankgun 70 medium, if antitankgun 70 too is up to u.Btw tankgun 50mm is a dead end hmm...so is tankgun 70 long, should br prereq of some other stuff.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Szun
(...)ah and tankgun 70 short should be prereq of tankgun 70 medium, if antitankgun 70 too is up to u.Btw tankgun 50mm is a dead end hmm...so is tankgun 70 long, should br prereq of some other stuff.

Not sure about that - short 70+mm were totally different then medium (and long) ones. First were simple infantry guns modified to fit into the turret, while medium nad long ones were usually modifications of AT guns. Which is included in their prerequisites.

In fact, most of the tank guns with serious AT capability got AT gun as a pre-req.
 
Originally posted by Szun
Valid point...
then tankgun 50 should fit in somewhere?

Tank gun 50mm was the peak of early tank tech. Soviets used those only in T-34-57, special AT version of standard T-34 equipped with long barreled ZIS-5 AT gun. But I belive that in HoI is rather the reflection of German 50mm tank gun or UK 57mm 6-pounder.

Today, to get 50mm tank gun you have to develop 40mm tank gun (and as the pre-req, 40mm AT).

To get 70mm medium, you have to get 40mm tank gun, so the pre-reqs are the same as in case of 50mm gun (plus be level higher). And since we change levels to 10/360 standard, that can be good enough.

Not sure if 50mm tank gun should be pre-reqisite for the 70+mm. Soviets used 57mm guns after the 76mm, not before, and USA simply skipped those.
 
Since you're reworking the air techs, I think I should share something I've been looking up.

The sprites used are tied to the model numbers, so I checked out which model number gets which sprite level.

For fighters, that's

Model 0 : level 1 sprite; (pre-war biplane)

Models 1 - 9 : level 2 sprite; (propeller driven)

Models 10 - 14 : level 3 sprite. (jets)

Models above 14 should also use the level 3 sprite, but the techtree doesn't have them.

Would there be a way to work the models in the new light air tech tree so that the models make sense in relation to the sprite? (The sprite doesn't absolutely have to be the one currently used, but it would be nice that you don't see jets zooming about when the unit is a spitfire)
 
I have tested the 360 Days and 10 IC cost for many techs, and higher cost for other techs, and they work great just like others say! I have seen larger nations research much more slowly, and fill out techs to a greater extent, and even lower IC nations are usually ahead of where they would normally be, strangely enough.

I am working on fixing up tech trees so that nations are researching the proper things, and are actually using the new system.

Instead of modifying each AI file, one at a time, I am making up basic tech trees to input into nations.

I am making up what I call "Survival Packs" that optimize research for very poor nations so they gain the best techs for them, such as Infantry tech that maximizes strength, minimizing supply use, and having the fastest research. Regarding tanks, my survival pack tries to get these nations to have Tankette research as a priority, since Tankettes are the first affordable tanks (they eat up a minimal amount of supply and oil, and are very fast)

I should be done my tech tree modifications by this weekend, which should make countries research using this new system much more efficiently.
 
I think that we need to revise which nations should get lower costing techs.

An interesting comparison is between Canada and Italy. Italy has just 20 IC more than Canada, but Canada gets a tech cost and time bonus, plus they have less of a military and population to support (so they can actually devote more IC to research). Canada is able to research more technology than Italy is. Historically Italy did a lot more independent research than Canada, but in the game Canada will probably end up with a better R&D program than Italy, or even France.

I am going to look at some of the nations in peculiar situations, like Sweden, Japan, Italy, etc. to see what ratio's work. Since these nations were able to research a fair amount of technology, but are lacking the IC to do so. The problem with these nations is that they cannot research both Industry and Military techs at the same time. They need to be able to affordably research at least 6 tech levels, perferrably 7, currently they can do about 3-4.

research_cost_app = 0.90
research_cost_theo = 0.90
research_time_app = 1.00
research_time_theo = 1.00

I don't want to mess with time costs.

Basically, the average tech is 1 IC cheaper (more expensive ones are even less expensive). This should help these nations, without causing too much abuse. This will hopefully let these nations research at least one more tech at a time, which still may not be enough.

----

I am even thinking of possibly increasing the ratio for the United States so they won't end up with loads of tech before they start the war and will have a balanced research program, not an advanced one.

research_cost_app = 1.02
research_cost_theo = 1.05
research_time_app = 1.00
research_time_theo = 1.00

I think doing changes like this in individual nation INC files is probably the best way to go to make tech affordable for medium range IC nations. I don't have time to test it tonight, but will test nations with modified tech costs tomorrow to see wether or not it is too much, or not enough. I don't want a massive decrease/increase, or else it will be manipulated by Human players too much.
 
Last edited:
in my current game US has 4 lvls more then japan in naval (5 more then me as germany but i only researched 2 lvls of sub tech)
Land and air I am3+4 lvls better.
I dont think that value is much trouble unless they reseach nukes.
Playing your mod2 atm fyi
p.s. 105 tankett divisons worked well against france too.
btw I conquered norway and schweden with 3 inf and 13 tankettes...


edit: short note, building Adv. Med tanks 80 in 41 with adv, light and hvy battalions.(comp lvl3)
UK uses (what ive see so far) basic mediun 50)

maybe a change to 3% for all comps is in order
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by McNaughton
I am going to look at some of the nations in peculiar situations, like Sweden, Japan, Italy, etc. to see what ratio's work. Since these nations were able to research a fair amount of technology, but are lacking the IC to do so. The problem with these nations is that they cannot research both Industry and Military techs at the same time. They need to be able to affordably research at least 6 tech levels, perferrably 7, currently they can do about 3-4.

Current variant of R&D modification is based on the IC of the country at the start of the scenario (Normal level).

IC higher then 100 IC - 0.9 theo
IC between 100 IC - 75 IC - 0.8 theo
IC 75 - 25 - 0.7 theo
IC below 25 - 0.5 theo, 0.7 app.

Or something like that...

We can always modify it a bit more and add IC 100+ countries to the list, but should be aware, that those countries got easy access to more IC (by conquests), so modifier is highly expliotable (Japan can get China, Italy - Yugoslavia).

I would say 0.1 change would not do much harm, but again - we should be very careful - ultimately Italian/Japan players will not be happy when they will be able to be more advanced in techs then Germans/USA. ;)
 
Armor Techtreechange & Hvy Tankunits

I thought long about some changes for the Techtree in the Armor section.
Some People insist on useing Hvy tanks and I must say I love Tigers, so me too :)

But befor I get to the Hvy tank I want to present some changes to Medium tanks that I see more acurate and historical.

Imp. Medium Tank 70 Long
In the history of WW2 many tank designs were used, some good some bad some cheap and others expensive. What would fall under Imp. Medium Tank would be the German PzKfw IV, the Soviet T34, the US M4 Sherman ...to name the best known.
None of them had a Tankgun as powerfull as the 75mm L 70 that was used in the Panther or a British 17Pdr.( Sherman only got the 17pdr in 43/44 from UK as a refit)
As a resolt I would recoment to remove the 70L and 80mm out if the Imp section and put that tankclass into the next upper 'Gold' Tech: Tank Applications, if not remove them completely.
It would be more historical to see e.g. the Sherman Firefly as a improvement to the comon Sherman.
Also the T34 first had a 76.2mm gun and only later the gun was improved to 85mm.
That move to the next Tech would reflect that.
If those tanks get deactivated by prior tankclasses is up for discution.

Hvy, Imp Hvy, Adv. Hvy and Super Hvys
At the moment the CORE techtree removed most of those hvy tanks and replaced them as a addition to the existing Medium tank Divisons, wich in my eyes is a more historical then Hvy divisons.
But, as we all know, the most famous tanks are Hvy tanks in WWII.
Tiger most of all.
Some ppl, incl me, that are fasinated(sp?) by tanks of WWII, look at the Hvy tanks in awe. (grin)
My idea to that:
Make 1 Tankunit per Hvy Tank 'class'
Basic
Improved
Advanced
Superheavy

My Imp hvy Tank unit would look as followed

Improved Heavy Tank

cost = 34
buildtime = 270
manpower = 8
maxspeed = 8
defaultorganisation = 30
grounddefence = 20
airdefence = 2
softattack = 18
hardattack = 24
airattack = 1
transportweight = 80
supplyconsumption = 6.4
fuelconsumption = 7
speed_cap_art = 8
speed_cap_eng = 100
speed_cap_at = 8
speed_cap_aa = 8

and as a compareison:

Improved Medium Tank (70+mm Medium)
model = {
cost = 14
buildtime = 190
manpower = 7
maxspeed = 8
defaultorganisation = 30
grounddefence = 10
airdefence = 1
softattack = 12
hardattack = 10
airattack = 1
transportweight = 40
supplyconsumption = 2.1
fuelconsumption = 3
speed_cap_art = 10
speed_cap_eng = 100
speed_cap_at = 10
speed_cap_aa = 10

My Adv.Hvy Tank unit would look as followed

Advanced Hvy Tank
model = {
cost = 45
buildtime = 320
manpower = 9
maxspeed = 6
defaultorganisation = 30
grounddefence = 24
airdefence = 3
softattack = 18
hardattack = 30
airattack = 1
transportweight = 90
supplyconsumption = 8.0
fuelconsumption = 9
speed_cap_art = 7
speed_cap_eng = 10
speed_cap_at = 7
speed_cap_aa = 7

Hvy Tanks used a lot more fuel then thier medium counterpart and they also needed heavier amunition wich I would reflect in the supplies needed. Even with less tanks in the divisons then in Medium divisons they still would need more manpower for logistics.
e.g. if 3 men can change a engine on a light tank I think U need at least 6 to 8 for a Kingtiger engine..no? (just a thought)
I spare me the Superheavy tank, but U see wich way I want to go with it. Still it should be playtested and worked on, if ppl aprove of my idea.
If some players want to choose if they use the Divison or the Battalion addon, then both should be in and should deactivate eachother to reflect the 'countries choise' of deployment.
Supply&Fuel must be finetuned, this is only a wild guess atm.

That's it from me for now...until my next brainstorming on tanks :D

P.S. buildcost 34 was 23 for upgrade in game so roughly 2/3 cost
and befor I forget... in WWII, only the best were inside a tigerclass tank, U may as well call them 'elite'. Not sure how the USSR handled that, but no doubt they used the best in the best tanks as well.
 
Last edited:
I don't like the idea of heavy tanks. It's both illogical and historically incorrect.

Moreover, the land speed of 8 is much too high. IMO it should be more of a 2-3... The same goes for air defence capability which, IMO, should be lower than that of Imp. Med. Tanks.
Cheers
 
Tigers had a topspeed on the road of 38 kp/h and a PzIV wasnt that much faster.
The higher airdefense should reflect the armor on top even most hvys had weakspots from obove.
P.S. every tank was weaker from above :D
But this is only the first makeup, finetuneing is still needed and every thought on itis wellcome.

...The weight of Ausf H was 25 tons, while that of Ausf G was 23.6 tons. Maximum road speed was 38km/h, while average road speed was 25km/h. ...

From 'Achtung Panzer' about PzIVH
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Szun
Tigers had a topspeed on the road of 38 kp/h and a PzIV wasnt that much faster.
The higher airdefense should reflect the armor on top even most hvys had weakspots from obove.
P.S. every tank was weaker from above :D
But this is only the first makeup, finetuneing is still needed and every thought on itis wellcome.

...The weight of Ausf H was 25 tons, while that of Ausf G was 23.6 tons. Maximum road speed was 38km/h, while average road speed was 25km/h. ...

From 'Achtung Panzer' about PzIVH

You refer to the tactical speed, while HoI is much more about operational speeds. When comparing speeds of Pz. IV and Pz. VI, compare their weight. Weight of the tank + fuel consumption were mayor factors delaing tanks (ability to cross smaler bridges/run without refueling). More consumed fuel = more trucks with fuel running = slower advance of the whole unit.
 
What Copper said :) The IV series had two or three times the operational radius of the VI series. In operational terms that has a higher impact than max speed.