Dumb question, but where is Wiki's TechMod project Forum?? I pop up from lurker mode to contribute something useful about the nuclear tech and find the thread moving twice.
-
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.
Re: Hvy tanks and stuff
I didn't say that historically there were ever heavy divisions. I did say that ability was there to build on if someone decided it was worthwhile (Hitler did some wierd things). I am also saying that the cost should be much greater than the cost of a similar generation medium tank division. The benefits shouldn't outweigh the cost in order to represent the reality of the situation. They should be a more powerful (that many heavy tanks would be a tough nut to crack), but not the two ro three times more powerful that the cost is worth it. Give the player the option of that unhistorical unit. Make them pay the price for their folly by giving it a high IC cost and take longer than a medium or light division.
As for light divsions, I think that should also be an option. Once again that would be less fighting strength for the same price as a medium division, with the only advantage being higher speed. I can imagine a situation where some old cavalry commander looking at the data for the Blitzkrieg and seeing that it wasn't the armor on the tanks that turned the table, but the speed of advance and the air support. They would see it valuable to build a division of lightly armored, fast tanks to exploit breaches.
Granted they aren't historical in the sense that they were built during WWII, but they are historical in the sense that the technology and the doctrines were present existed that could have resulted in their construction. Historically, the leaders went for a balanced approach which was the correct one. Why not give the player the ability to make a mistake because of the love for a particular unit? MDow
I didn't say that historically there were ever heavy divisions. I did say that ability was there to build on if someone decided it was worthwhile (Hitler did some wierd things). I am also saying that the cost should be much greater than the cost of a similar generation medium tank division. The benefits shouldn't outweigh the cost in order to represent the reality of the situation. They should be a more powerful (that many heavy tanks would be a tough nut to crack), but not the two ro three times more powerful that the cost is worth it. Give the player the option of that unhistorical unit. Make them pay the price for their folly by giving it a high IC cost and take longer than a medium or light division.
As for light divsions, I think that should also be an option. Once again that would be less fighting strength for the same price as a medium division, with the only advantage being higher speed. I can imagine a situation where some old cavalry commander looking at the data for the Blitzkrieg and seeing that it wasn't the armor on the tanks that turned the table, but the speed of advance and the air support. They would see it valuable to build a division of lightly armored, fast tanks to exploit breaches.
Granted they aren't historical in the sense that they were built during WWII, but they are historical in the sense that the technology and the doctrines were present existed that could have resulted in their construction. Historically, the leaders went for a balanced approach which was the correct one. Why not give the player the ability to make a mistake because of the love for a particular unit? MDow
because it is a tech tree issue, it is moved to the proper thread, the tech tree one...
ground_def_eff
With the new ground_def_eff it seems that combat has been slowed down considerably in the early years. Ethiopia now has a chance to survive but in most games they are annexed within 6-18 months.
Japan struggles against China, I think this is again due to ComChi being part of the war and the Japanese AI assigning too many troops to that front. I'll tweak the AI front parameters again.
The Spanish Civil War has definitely slowed down IMHO. It took me two years to finish it and I don't consider myself a bad player. One interesting point was the battle of Mahon:
Attacker Republican Spain:
Skill 4 field marshal
1 armor division, 2 infantry divisions
2 tac bombers, 1 strat bomber, 3 fighters constant bombardment
Entire Spanish navy in support (multiple BB, CA)
Negative modifiers for hills, amphib assault
Defender Nationalist Spain:
Skill 3 General
1 Infantry Division
Dug-in
Negative modifiers for encircled and shore bombardment
Normally in HoI I would expect 3:1 odds (esp. with armor on the attacking side) to win every time with low losses. Terrain and amphib assault modifier would increase losses and time to win, but air and navy support would offset some of that.
This time the outcome was that both my infantry divisions were destroyed and a few days later the enemy was destroyed. My armor suffered 40 points of strength loss and my airforce suffered maybe 30 points losses.
IMHO this is a good change, while 3:1 odds should probably win most battles it's really the smallest force you can expect would win in a battle of attrition against dug-in enemy in good defensive terrain. Previously in HoI I think losses were too low, this is a shift away from that.
EDIT: Footnote, the battle for Mahon laster 22 days.
With the new ground_def_eff it seems that combat has been slowed down considerably in the early years. Ethiopia now has a chance to survive but in most games they are annexed within 6-18 months.
Japan struggles against China, I think this is again due to ComChi being part of the war and the Japanese AI assigning too many troops to that front. I'll tweak the AI front parameters again.
The Spanish Civil War has definitely slowed down IMHO. It took me two years to finish it and I don't consider myself a bad player. One interesting point was the battle of Mahon:
Attacker Republican Spain:
Skill 4 field marshal
1 armor division, 2 infantry divisions
2 tac bombers, 1 strat bomber, 3 fighters constant bombardment
Entire Spanish navy in support (multiple BB, CA)
Negative modifiers for hills, amphib assault
Defender Nationalist Spain:
Skill 3 General
1 Infantry Division
Dug-in
Negative modifiers for encircled and shore bombardment
Normally in HoI I would expect 3:1 odds (esp. with armor on the attacking side) to win every time with low losses. Terrain and amphib assault modifier would increase losses and time to win, but air and navy support would offset some of that.
This time the outcome was that both my infantry divisions were destroyed and a few days later the enemy was destroyed. My armor suffered 40 points of strength loss and my airforce suffered maybe 30 points losses.
IMHO this is a good change, while 3:1 odds should probably win most battles it's really the smallest force you can expect would win in a battle of attrition against dug-in enemy in good defensive terrain. Previously in HoI I think losses were too low, this is a shift away from that.
EDIT: Footnote, the battle for Mahon laster 22 days.
Last edited:
Tech Sharing
I am coming up with some events to represent a limited form of tech sharing/selling that took place during this period. This will provide some minor nations with equipment that they did use in large numbers, either delivered in large quantity, or delivered and had the ability to produce it.
I have done some events for Commonwealth nations, since the current system is a bit random for sharing things, rarely giving commonwealth nations actual units, like new tank and aircraft types.
Here is an event that shares the Vickers Light Tank to commonwealth nations. By 1939 over 800 were produced, and most commonwealth nations had their light tank needs met by the UK providing them with enough Vickers Light tanks. This gives these nations the ability to develop their own version of a Basic Light Tank, but they have to research the actual production version. This will stop these nations from producing Great War tanks.
I am planning for other tech sharing/selling events, which will ocurr only under specific circumstances.
"Turin Tank" HUNGARY
trigger requirements (Czechoslovakia does not exist, Hungary is allied with Germany, it is 1940 or later)
2201 Basic Gear
2202 Basic Suspension
2203 Basic Engine
2101 Basic Optical Sights
2103 Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
14011 Tank Gun 30mm+
"Artillery" COMMONWEALTH (works like the Vickers Light Tank event)
14005 Field Artillery Gun 70mm+
14009 Anti-Tank Gun 40mm+
14105 Tank Gun 40mm+
1203 Anti-Tank Rifle
"Hurricane I" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, it is 1938)
10000 Basic Fighter Development
10004 Basic Medium Range Engines
10103 Basic MR Fighter Prototype Tests
"Blenheim" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, both at war)
9002 Basic Medium-Range Bomber Engine
9005 Basic Medium Bomber Airframe
9104 Basic Medium-Range Bomber Prototype Tests
"Valentine (Infantry Tank)" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, it is 1940)
2985 Infantry Support Tank Prototype
"Ram" Canada
trigger requirements (US and UK have the tech, both at war)
2301 Improved Gear (from US)
2302 Improved Suspension (from US)
2303 Improved Engine (from US)
14206 Tank Gun 50mm+ (from UK)
"Sentinal" Australia
trigger requirements (US and UK have the tech, both at war)
2301 Improved Gear (from US)
2302 Improved Suspension (from US)
2303 Improved Engine (from US)
14206 Tank Gun 50mm+ (from UK)
"37mm Bofors AT Gun" Holland, Finland, Romania, Denmark, Poland
trigger requirements (Sweden has the tech)
14008 Anti-Tank Gun 30mm+
"37mm PAK AT Gun" Spain, Japan, USSR, Romania, Italy
trigger requirements (Germany has the tech and not at war with any of the nations)
14008 Anti-Tank Gun 30mm+
Each of these events have a basis in history. The Canadian Ram and Australian Sentinal Medium Tanks were both based off of the US M3 Lee chasis and UK 2 Pounder/6 Pounder anti-tank guns (with the superstructures/turrets being indigenous). 37mm AT Guns were sold by Sweden and Germany in sufficient numbers to equip entire armies and/or to start domestic production. Hungary purchased the rights from the German occupied Skoda factory to produce a modified LT vs 35 tank, which they called the Turin.
The nations who are selling this equipment will probably benefit best by getting Influence points, plus modifying the nation who purchases the equipment toward your political viewpoint. I have a few more event ideas, but don't want to give too much to these nations.
I am coming up with some events to represent a limited form of tech sharing/selling that took place during this period. This will provide some minor nations with equipment that they did use in large numbers, either delivered in large quantity, or delivered and had the ability to produce it.
I have done some events for Commonwealth nations, since the current system is a bit random for sharing things, rarely giving commonwealth nations actual units, like new tank and aircraft types.
Here is an event that shares the Vickers Light Tank to commonwealth nations. By 1939 over 800 were produced, and most commonwealth nations had their light tank needs met by the UK providing them with enough Vickers Light tanks. This gives these nations the ability to develop their own version of a Basic Light Tank, but they have to research the actual production version. This will stop these nations from producing Great War tanks.
Code:
#################################################
# Tech Sharing: Commonwealth Vickers Light Tank #
#################################################
event = {
id = 123456
random = no
country = ENG
trigger = {
war = { country = GER country = ENG }
technology = 2201 #Basic Gear
technology = 2202 #Basic Suspension
technology = 2203 #Basic Engine
technology = 2101 #Basic Optical Sights
technology = 2103 #Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
}
name = "Send the Vickers to the Commonwealth"
desc = "At the outbreak of war England provided enough Vickers Light Tanks to Commonwealth nations to meet their early war needs."
style = 0
date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1936 }
offset = 15
deathdate = { day = 30 month = december year = 1944 }
action_a = {
name = "Ok"
command = { type = influence value = 2 }
}
}
###########################################
# Tech Sharing: Canada Vickers Light Tank #
###########################################
event = {
id = 123456
random = no
country = CAN
trigger = {
event = #Tech Sharing Commonwealth Vickers Light Tank
}
name = "Vickers Light Tank delivery"
desc = "England has provided us with the Vickers Light Tank."
style = 0
action_a = {
name = "Ok"
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2201 } # Basic Gear
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2202 } # Basic Suspension
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2203 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2101 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2103 } # Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
}
}
##############################################
# Tech Sharing: Australia Vickers Light Tank #
##############################################
event = {
id = 123456
random = no
country = AST
trigger = {
event = #Tech Sharing Commonwealth Vickers Light Tank
}
name = "Vickers Light Tank delivery"
desc = "England has provided us with the Vickers Light Tank."
style = 0
action_a = {
name = "Ok"
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2201 } # Basic Gear
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2202 } # Basic Suspension
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2203 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2101 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2103 } # Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
}
}
#################################################
# Tech Sharing: South Africa Vickers Light Tank #
#################################################
event = {
id = 123456
random = no
country = SAF
trigger = {
event = #Tech Sharing Commonwealth Vickers Light Tank
}
name = "Vickers Light Tank delivery"
desc = "England has provided us with the Vickers Light Tank."
style = 0
action_a = {
name = "Ok"
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2201 } # Basic Gear
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2202 } # Basic Suspension
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2203 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2101 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2103 } # Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
}
}
################################################
# Tech Sharing: New Zealand Vickers Light Tank #
################################################
event = {
id = 123456
random = no
country = NZL
trigger = {
event = #Tech Sharing Commonwealth Vickers Light Tank
}
name = "Vickers Light Tank delivery"
desc = "England has provided us with the Vickers Light Tank."
style = 0
action_a = {
name = "Ok"
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2201 } # Basic Gear
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2202 } # Basic Suspension
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2203 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2101 } # Basic Engine
command = { type = gain_tech which = 2103 } # Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
}
}I am planning for other tech sharing/selling events, which will ocurr only under specific circumstances.
"Turin Tank" HUNGARY
trigger requirements (Czechoslovakia does not exist, Hungary is allied with Germany, it is 1940 or later)
2201 Basic Gear
2202 Basic Suspension
2203 Basic Engine
2101 Basic Optical Sights
2103 Basic Light Tank Prototype Tests
14011 Tank Gun 30mm+
"Artillery" COMMONWEALTH (works like the Vickers Light Tank event)
14005 Field Artillery Gun 70mm+
14009 Anti-Tank Gun 40mm+
14105 Tank Gun 40mm+
1203 Anti-Tank Rifle
"Hurricane I" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, it is 1938)
10000 Basic Fighter Development
10004 Basic Medium Range Engines
10103 Basic MR Fighter Prototype Tests
"Blenheim" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, both at war)
9002 Basic Medium-Range Bomber Engine
9005 Basic Medium Bomber Airframe
9104 Basic Medium-Range Bomber Prototype Tests
"Valentine (Infantry Tank)" Canada
trigger requirements (England has the tech, it is 1940)
2985 Infantry Support Tank Prototype
"Ram" Canada
trigger requirements (US and UK have the tech, both at war)
2301 Improved Gear (from US)
2302 Improved Suspension (from US)
2303 Improved Engine (from US)
14206 Tank Gun 50mm+ (from UK)
"Sentinal" Australia
trigger requirements (US and UK have the tech, both at war)
2301 Improved Gear (from US)
2302 Improved Suspension (from US)
2303 Improved Engine (from US)
14206 Tank Gun 50mm+ (from UK)
"37mm Bofors AT Gun" Holland, Finland, Romania, Denmark, Poland
trigger requirements (Sweden has the tech)
14008 Anti-Tank Gun 30mm+
"37mm PAK AT Gun" Spain, Japan, USSR, Romania, Italy
trigger requirements (Germany has the tech and not at war with any of the nations)
14008 Anti-Tank Gun 30mm+
Each of these events have a basis in history. The Canadian Ram and Australian Sentinal Medium Tanks were both based off of the US M3 Lee chasis and UK 2 Pounder/6 Pounder anti-tank guns (with the superstructures/turrets being indigenous). 37mm AT Guns were sold by Sweden and Germany in sufficient numbers to equip entire armies and/or to start domestic production. Hungary purchased the rights from the German occupied Skoda factory to produce a modified LT vs 35 tank, which they called the Turin.
The nations who are selling this equipment will probably benefit best by getting Influence points, plus modifying the nation who purchases the equipment toward your political viewpoint. I have a few more event ideas, but don't want to give too much to these nations.
Starting Tech
I have modified some nation's starting tech to fill in the gaps between tech they have and requirements to get it, and it doesn't really result in an AI problem. With France having the equipment allowing them to build the tanks they have in service results in a better all-round research patter. Their aircraft research has increased focus, and they actually have some basic aircraft (instead of using 1936 planes in 1940).
It doesn't throw off the game that much, and improves AI minor nation behaviour, especially now that many minors will now have the ability to build tankettes. This is a pivotal point in a Minor nation's existence. Great War era tanks are slow, and eat up loads of supply and oil, while Tankettes may be weaker, but are significantly faster (faster than even cavlary) and use substantially less oil and supplies.
I know that this could lead to a French human player abusing the system and getting a much stronger army through exploiting the research system, but we should not handicap the AI because we are afraid of Hunan cheating.
I have modified some nation's starting tech to fill in the gaps between tech they have and requirements to get it, and it doesn't really result in an AI problem. With France having the equipment allowing them to build the tanks they have in service results in a better all-round research patter. Their aircraft research has increased focus, and they actually have some basic aircraft (instead of using 1936 planes in 1940).
It doesn't throw off the game that much, and improves AI minor nation behaviour, especially now that many minors will now have the ability to build tankettes. This is a pivotal point in a Minor nation's existence. Great War era tanks are slow, and eat up loads of supply and oil, while Tankettes may be weaker, but are significantly faster (faster than even cavlary) and use substantially less oil and supplies.
I know that this could lead to a French human player abusing the system and getting a much stronger army through exploiting the research system, but we should not handicap the AI because we are afraid of Hunan cheating.
Tech question
I have a question regarding the tech preferences in the specific AI files.
I know that endgoals are things that we want the AI to achieve, like designing the Basic Light Tank 20mm, but the preferences are the priorities in which to get to it.
The question I have, is does this go in order? An example is the following.
Does this mean that Infantry has a higher priority than Artillery? Or does it try to research all of these techs equally?
Also, I notice that endgoal isn't used much in the AI files, does this part of the AI file work?
I have a question regarding the tech preferences in the specific AI files.
I know that endgoals are things that we want the AI to achieve, like designing the Basic Light Tank 20mm, but the preferences are the priorities in which to get to it.
The question I have, is does this go in order? An example is the following.
Code:
# Infantry
1101 1102 1103 1105 1106 1202 1204 1206 1207 1302 1303 1304 1305 1400 1401 1976 1402 1974 1403
1404 1407 1408 1500 1501 1502 1504 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1700 1701 1705 1800 1802 1803 1805
# Artillery
14973 14010 14008 14009 14011 14100 14105 14200 14205 14206 14300 14976 14002 14004 14005 14006
14007 14009 14010 14011 14013 14101 14102 14103 14104 14105 14106 14201 14202 14203 14204 14206
14207 14209 14976 14306 14400 14977 14402 14404 14405 14500 14600 14601 14700 14701 14702 14800
14804Does this mean that Infantry has a higher priority than Artillery? Or does it try to research all of these techs equally?
Also, I notice that endgoal isn't used much in the AI files, does this part of the AI file work?
Should Basic Comupters (3101 and 3103) be the goal for every nation in the AI files?
Poland should have the tech from the beginning, it was in production since 1935.
Cheers
Re: Tech question
AI uses the list (whole list, order is not important) as a dictionary. When it comes to choose new tech for research, AI:
1) according to the ratios connected with the tech branches choose the next type of research (so if for example artillery is 3.0 and navy 1.0, there is serious chance, that artillery will be chosen more frequent). There is no proof though, that 3:1 ratio means 3 times more frequent choosing - it also depends on other branches ratios, as well as on the cost of chosen tech.
2) after initial choice, AI checks the list of prefered techs and if it find researchable tech on the list, it goes for it. If there is more researchable techs on the list, AI always choose the earlier one (on the tech tree), not more advanced.
3) back to the point (1).
Conclusion - while very useful, paths without good ratios are not enough to ensure that AI will make good, balanced R&D. Most of the time paths are enough to ensure, that AI will make steady progress in "focused" R&D, but when it comes to interlinked branches (like tanks with pre-requisites in doctrines/artillery), problems grow rapidly. While humans can easy switch to new "ratios" when it's neccessary, AI is unable to do this without huge number of AI files. Adding various pre-reqisites to the techs make game hard for humans, but for AI - even harder.
Right now, there are 4 classes of nations (in AI effective R&D terms):
1) USA (and middle-war GER) - 700+ IC granting enough R&D to support 5-7 branches at once.
2) USSR, UK, early GER - approx. 300+ IC (in case of UK - Commonwealth partially included) - 4-5 branches at once.
3) ITA, FRA, JAP, some minors - 100-250 IC - 3-4 branches at once.
4) the rest - 1-2 branches.
AI uses the list (whole list, order is not important) as a dictionary. When it comes to choose new tech for research, AI:
1) according to the ratios connected with the tech branches choose the next type of research (so if for example artillery is 3.0 and navy 1.0, there is serious chance, that artillery will be chosen more frequent). There is no proof though, that 3:1 ratio means 3 times more frequent choosing - it also depends on other branches ratios, as well as on the cost of chosen tech.
2) after initial choice, AI checks the list of prefered techs and if it find researchable tech on the list, it goes for it. If there is more researchable techs on the list, AI always choose the earlier one (on the tech tree), not more advanced.
3) back to the point (1).
Conclusion - while very useful, paths without good ratios are not enough to ensure that AI will make good, balanced R&D. Most of the time paths are enough to ensure, that AI will make steady progress in "focused" R&D, but when it comes to interlinked branches (like tanks with pre-requisites in doctrines/artillery), problems grow rapidly. While humans can easy switch to new "ratios" when it's neccessary, AI is unable to do this without huge number of AI files. Adding various pre-reqisites to the techs make game hard for humans, but for AI - even harder.
Right now, there are 4 classes of nations (in AI effective R&D terms):
1) USA (and middle-war GER) - 700+ IC granting enough R&D to support 5-7 branches at once.
2) USSR, UK, early GER - approx. 300+ IC (in case of UK - Commonwealth partially included) - 4-5 branches at once.
3) ITA, FRA, JAP, some minors - 100-250 IC - 3-4 branches at once.
4) the rest - 1-2 branches.
No. It's really only worth it for nations with a fairly high number of IC assigned to R&D.
Re: Starting Tech
I believe that was the point behind not giving (in vanilla HoI) all the countries their starting techs, as well as making many powerfull techs easy to research in faulty assumption, that most of the players will use balanced research...
Let's face it - if we not keep some "blocks", especially in case of mayor-minor nations, level of difficulty will seriously drop, possibly to the one we remember from 1.02 patches. And that means - serious drop of playbility. I know, our goal is historicity - but we should remember that many players (in fact, most of them) expect from the game at least some challenge.
On the other hand, we can make of minor-mayors and minors life easier by more serious change of research_cost modifier. Right now, most of the minors countries got levels costs lowered, and some of them got also lower cost of applications. We can make this change more serious, as well as add some modifiers for minor-mayors.
I believe that was the point behind not giving (in vanilla HoI) all the countries their starting techs, as well as making many powerfull techs easy to research in faulty assumption, that most of the players will use balanced research...
Let's face it - if we not keep some "blocks", especially in case of mayor-minor nations, level of difficulty will seriously drop, possibly to the one we remember from 1.02 patches. And that means - serious drop of playbility. I know, our goal is historicity - but we should remember that many players (in fact, most of them) expect from the game at least some challenge.
On the other hand, we can make of minor-mayors and minors life easier by more serious change of research_cost modifier. Right now, most of the minors countries got levels costs lowered, and some of them got also lower cost of applications. We can make this change more serious, as well as add some modifiers for minor-mayors.
Yo, Copper, what do you think about making Early Halftracks a prereq for Mechanized HQs? If you don't have halftracks, after all--and this is way before the APC stage--it's going to be hard to have mechanized infantry.
The suggestion was once put forth that one should have to research several levels up into halftracks for this. I disagree, especially because halftracks really didn't get that advanced anyway. Their obvious weakness caused them to give way to the APC. However, I do think it's in the realm of reason to require halftracks in order to get a start with mechs.
jkk
The suggestion was once put forth that one should have to research several levels up into halftracks for this. I disagree, especially because halftracks really didn't get that advanced anyway. Their obvious weakness caused them to give way to the APC. However, I do think it's in the realm of reason to require halftracks in order to get a start with mechs.
jkk
Re: Tech Sharing
Make sure that there is a B choice that gives the option of not sharing the tech. MDow
Make sure that there is a B choice that gives the option of not sharing the tech. MDow
Re: halftracks & Mech HQ
Note that in vanilla HoI 1.05c Mech HQs require Improved Halftracks.Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Fully agree. I'll add this change as soon I unpack 0.61 files.
Shouldnt there be a doctorine that simulates the finnish and their good morale during the winter war?
Re: Re: halftracks & Mech HQ
Ow. Really? That's uglier than a herd of warthogs.
jkk
Ow. Really? That's uglier than a herd of warthogs.
jkk