Cold War Tech Tree Extension Project

[ozman2]

danielshannon,
Thank you for your continued suggestions. The USSR certainly needs a doctrine researcher. IMO they were reasonably competent in all fields except management and electronics. A lot of what they did was to compensate for their inferiority and put on a credible bluff.

As for your other suggestions I take them seriously but will wait for the version after next as I plan to overhaul the land doctrine in line with previous posts. I'd like my next version to at least be free from major bugs. I'll likely also put in your ideas and the suggestion of MIRVed missiles in the late 60s. I did get a picture of Soviet doctrine from Glantz's analysis of the Soviet Manchurian operation. IMO Soviet and American land doctrine differed only in their management of tanks--Americans essentially adopted the German philosophy coupled with deception of the enemy as to where the spearhead would occur. Soviet doctrine stressed offensive across an entire front and rapid advance before the enemy could put up resistance. I'll probably implement Warsaw doctrine as a night movement bonus with more morale but less overall max_org. than the US. The American side had more experience with amphibious landings, and I believe both sides had experience with paratroopers. Likely I'll give different armor trees and give the US and Soviets common access to other trees, with Soviet access to marine-amphibious and air-cav technologies coming a little bit later. So I think the post-war land doctrines are going to resemble the naval doctrines whereby you have access to most of the technologies but at different times. For Sino-Japanese doctrine will probably just add infantry bonuses to the guerrilla tree, which presently has mostly militia bonuses.

Since you've read the book and I haven't, feel free to post your opinions if they differ markedly from my analysis.

North Korea is now slighted because it does not have a port so it wastes time researching Great War ships. So I'll have to make sure it gets one. Poland needs a close look. The E3 mod people discovered about 10 teams, and many of them are good (a few would not be appropriate under communism). The other thing to consider is that Poland and Czechoslovakia were crushed by the Germans and re-created by the Soviets, so they should have essentially all the technologies the Soviets had except for rocketry and nuclear technologies. If Sokolovsky is added and all this is taken care of and the Soviets still are excessively behind then I need to look at other issues--whether computer techs are weighted too heavily or as a last resort, give the USSR a research bonus, or more techtheft events.

 

[dannyboy2016]

One advantage that the Warsaw pact had, in terms of Tanks, was that every member used soviet tanks and equipment. That degree of standardization would have been helpful in the event of a real war. I think that any Warsaw pact armor tree should give their armor a higher morale and org bonus than the NATO armor doctrines.

Gorbachev was the first post war Soviet leader to insist that the General staff draw up defensive plans for the European theater. Till then, Soviet planning assumed that the Soviets would strike first. I think any Warsaw pact doctrine should give bonuses to assault, encirclement, and breakthrough chances. The post war NATO doctrines should give bonuses to tactical withdrawal, counterattack, and delay chances.

Re: Soviet access to Marine doctrines. The Soviets didn't put much emphasis on amphibious operations in the early part of the cold war. The Soviet Naval infantry were disbanded in the early 1950s. In July of 58, President Camille Chamoun of Lebanon requested American assistance to counter a threat by the USSR to deploy volunteers to assist pro Nasser rebels. The US Sixth fleet was able to land three Marine battalions the very next day. That pretty much ended the pro Nasser rebellion and convinced the Soviets that they should re-establish the Naval infantry. They should get access to these marine naval doctrines around 1960.

One possibility is to allow both the American naval doctrine tree and the 1956 marine division tech to unlock these new amphibious warfare doctrines. That way anyone who devoted themselves to marine research could eventually unlock that doctrine tree, while the Americans could research it earlier.

 

[ozman2]

danielshannon,

Ideas are shaping up. They won't be in 0.13 but I expect them to be in 0.14. They are:
1) NATO (or Germany) starts with higher max_org but lower morale than Warsaw. This is a result of the existing Paradox trees. I forgot the exact numbers but I believe that either the American tree or the German tree ends with about 30 more max_org than does the Human Wave Tree. However the Human Wave tree ends with about 60 higher morale. So my thought is just to give Warsaw more max_org but only on tanks, plus the night movement bonuses, which is the only way I can think of to implement speed increase.
2) NATO can access the defensive, marine and air-cav techs first, whereas Warsaw gets the tanks first. I think Germany (hypothetical) should get the tanks first.
3) Human Wave has a branch point. The last two techs lead to the modern Warsaw doctrine. However, with Guerrilla Warfare, China can opt for a modernized guerrilla/infantry tree instead. Tank doctrines were totally unsuited for them for many years.

Your description of Soviet Cold war doctrine is strikingly similar to Victor Suvorov's analysis of Soviet strategic planning on the eve of Operation Barbarossa.

So I'm taking your ideas seriously but expect to release 0.13 without them in order to have a (hopefully) bug free release and a final check on the relative speed of Soviet and NATO research. I also want initial testing on the revamped Chinese Civil War for 0.13.

Do you have any good air doctrine people for the Soviets?

BTW I've also read that the Soviets were initially a bit ahead of the Americans in rocket technology. The Americans got von Braun but the Soviet side got his #2 man, Helmut Gröttrup, who disliked vonBraun and wanted to continue his research in Germany. Plus they overran Peenemuende itself. Unfortunately for the Soviets, they kidnapped Gröttrup and took him to the Soviet Union, where he initially helped Korolev. Gröttrup ended up defecting to West Germany, where he became a chip-card inventor. One possible alternate history is that the Soviets do not kidnap him and East Germany gets a skill 8 rocketry-chemistry-electronics expert, who invents the silicon transistor in East Germany. Anyway when I read that it is absolutely clear that the Soviets had all the German rocket blueprints.

 

[dannyboy2016]

I can think of two good candidates for Soviet air Doctrine tech teams:
The first would be Vershinin Konstantin Andreevich, Novikov's sucessor. I'd say give him a skill 6 or 7 and
combined arms;aircraft_testing;bomber_tactics;fighter_tactics
http://www.warheroes.ru/hero/images/1hero/VershininKonstAndr.jpg
start him in 1946

Another possibility is Aleksandr Ivanovich Pokryshkin. He was a well respected tactician, but he wound up being politically incorrect on some issue of the day and fell out of favor.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/common/4/40/Pokryshkin_3_Gold_Stars.jpg
I'd say skill 7 aircraft_testing;fighter_tactics;piloting;

I have mixed feelings about Pokryshkin. He'd be good for this kind of role, but in real life he was too "politically incorrect" to be given a position like this.

 

[ozman2]

DS,
From my quick read I'd say Pokshyrin would be OK with a 1957 start. And I'll start Andreeevich in 1946. Does that sound reasonable? Pokshyrin was a deputy defense minister in 57. The article was in Russian but I used Google translate and what happened is unclear in the translation but it seems he was demoted under Stalin but gained favor later on. Another option is to wake him in 57 by event provided that Beria is not head of government (sometimes happens from event 400). Anyway I expect an interim release very soon.

 

[dannyboy2016]

DS,
From my quick read I'd say Pokshyrin would be OK with a 1957 start. And I'll start Andreeevich in 1946. Does that sound reasonable? Pokshyrin was a deputy defense minister in 57. The article was in Russian but I used Google translate and what happened is unclear in the translation but it seems he was demoted under Stalin but gained favor later on. Another option is to wake him in 57 by event provided that Beria is not head of government (sometimes happens from event 400). Anyway I expect an interim release very soon.

Sounds good to me. I eagerly await your next release.

 

[Ringwraith_JP]

For Soviet Land Doctrine i would suggest General Aleksei Innokentevich Antonov, he was chief of staff of the Warsaw Pact forces from 1955 to 1962.

 

[ozman2]

I re-read things and found out my initial info was incorrect. Will put in Andreevich in 46 temporarily sleeping Novikov, who can come back in 53 after Stalin dies. It seems that Novikov was removed on trumped up charges because Stalin found out the US had better spy planes. Pokshyrin's problem was that he preferred to use US planes rather than Soviet planes, because he thought they were better. Unless relations between the US and USSR are very warm he'd be politically incorrect. So he won't go in.

I already have
3707;Alexander Vasilevsky;T3707;7;1940;1970;combined_arms_focus;large_unit_tactics;centralized_execution;training;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;x
3731;Vasily Sokolovsky;T3731;7;1952;1968;combined_arms_focus;large_unit_tactics;centralized_execution;infantry_focus;training;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;x
for land doctrines.
I can add Antonov from about 1944 or 1945 to 1962 if you can suggest where he would add to the skill set. (small unit tactics, decentralized execution maybe?) He was commander of the southern front in WW2.

BTW Am planning on making Stalin's death in 1953 a 100% probability event. In vanilla there is a 10% chance that he lives. Any objections? I'll have more flexible succession though, with possibilities of coup events afterwards going either way, so Kruschev doesn't always wind up in charge in 1958.

 

[dannyboy2016]

Antonov helped plan Operation Bagration, didn't he? I'd say combined arms focus, training, management, decentralized execution,large unit tactics. I'd give him a skill of 5 or 6. Btw does Boris Shaposhnikov and his tech team die in 1945, or do they live on?

Your ideas for a post stalin power struggle are intriguing. I wonder what direction Beria would have taken the USSR in.

 

[ozman2]

Ok then, Antonov is helpful. Too bad the Soviets don't have a small units tactics or individual courage person. Shaposhnikov dies in 45 as in real life.

 

[dannyboy2016]

Rodion Malinovsky would be a good Soviet tech team for decentralized execution and individual courage.

Rodion Yakovlevich Malinovsky
skill 7
decentralized execution, large unit tactics, combined arms, training,individual courage
start 1953

 

[safferli]

Not that every country needs a tech team for every speciality. The US and allies should still have a tech advantage. Still, Soviet doctrines were quite successful. But I am no expert on that field.

 

[ozman2]

The issue here is that initial testing has determined that the game is not balanced. The US and its allies have the advantage of several 5-tech slot allies that can trade blueprints, whereas the Soviet Union has to bear the weight of the alliance alone. (They had Communist China from 1953 to about 1960 but they had very little to give technology-wise). I'm still going to be careful to preserve the US advantage in naval (especially carrier), electronics, marines, and management-related technologies, which is where they were clearly better. But the historical experience is that the Soviets achieved near-parity in key areas, concentrating on the military at the expense of industry. I'm for example NOT going to give the Soviets anything like IG Farben, and I don't mind if they are behind in industrial technology as long as they can stay within striking range in some areas.

The Soviets did have the unexploited opportunity of resource industrialist and theoretical scientist armaments ministers.

The Soviets never ruled the waves, but later in the Cold War were able to present a significant challenge with their missile cruisers.

In many cases what they did was to copy designs of the West. They actually knew they were behind and concentrated on putting on as credible bluff.

danielshannon,
Malinovsky was your best find, and that fits the history whereby things got better after Stalin died. He'll get skill 7, 1954 start date but woken by Stalin's death.

The only thing missing from the Soviet side in land doctrines is small unit tactics. That's acceptable. That can be Ho Chi Minh's area as well as the US side (and I think British also) in their attempts to fight them. If the US does not have a small unit tactics person they need one. (Maybe West Germany's von Manstein?) Small unit tactics can be the basis in part of marines and air cav doctrines that the US can research more easily, and earlier.

 

[dannyboy2016]

The issue here is that initial testing has determined that the game is not balanced. The US and its allies have the advantage of several 5-tech slot allies that can trade blueprints, whereas the Soviet Union has to bear the weight of the alliance alone. (They had Communist China from 1953 to about 1960 but they had very little to give technology-wise). I'm still going to be careful to preserve the US advantage in naval (especially carrier), electronics, marines, and management-related technologies, which is where they were clearly better. But the historical experience is that the Soviets achieved near-parity in key areas, concentrating on the military at the expense of industry. I'm for example NOT going to give the Soviets anything like IG Farben, and I don't mind if they are behind in industrial technology as long as they can stay within striking range in some areas.

The Soviets did have the unexploited opportunity of resource industrialist and theoretical scientist armaments ministers.

The Soviets never ruled the waves, but later in the Cold War were able to present a significant challenge with their missile cruisers.

In many cases what they did was to copy designs of the West. They actually knew they were behind and concentrated on putting on as credible bluff.

danielshannon,
Malinovsky was your best find, and that fits the history whereby things got better after Stalin died. He'll get skill 7, 1954 start date but woken by Stalin's death.

The only thing missing from the Soviet side in land doctrines is small unit tactics. That's acceptable. That can be Ho Chi Minh's area as well as the US side (and I think British also) in their attempts to fight them. If the US does not have a small unit tactics person they need one. (Maybe West Germany's von Manstein?) Small unit tactics can be the basis in part of marines and air cav doctrines that the US can research more easily, and earlier.

Did you get my pm with new US tech team suggestions? Two of them had small unit tactics

Creighton Williams Abrams Jr.
start 1949 ends 1970 skill 7
combined arms focus, training, small unit tactics

Hamilton Hawkins Howze
start 1955 skill 7
training, small unit tactics,centralized execution, aircraft testing, combined arms focus

 

[ozman2]

Yes I got your PM and it sounds good. Will put them in the next version but am rushing out 0.13 without them. Primary issues are in this release:
--Do Soviets advance at an acceptable rate?
--Chinese Civil War
--Is release free of bugs?
If there are no major bugs will proceed to revamp the tech tree and update the western tech teams for 0.14 Sounds like Abrams could be matched to marines and Howze to air cavalry. I also wouldn't mind seeing MacArthur even though Truman will fire him.

EDIT--Version 0.13 is now out. See the link in my sig.

 

[Lt Hilsdorf]

I'm trying a new game right now. Few things I've noticed as of `46:

-India doesn't have an IC mod like the readme says. It still has 100/80 IC and I think thats a bit ridiculous, but maybe it's historical

-No more issues with getting Nationalist leaders during the cease fire event so thats great

-The units Commie China gets in many of the events are 1918 infantry. Is this intentional? I figure `36 or `39 might me more appropriate at least, unless its suppose to represent under-trained units...

And one question:

-Is there a surrender event for Commie China when they conquer most of the mainland? I remember in 1.2 I had to literally conquer everything and annex the Nationalists, including taking Taiwan. If not, is there any possibility of making an event so the nationalists can still exist on Taiwan? If someone can give me some ideas for what could trigger such an event I could write it. I just don't know alot about the civil war to determine what could end it.

 

[archangel5]

Hey,
I downloaded .12a and love the new tech tree. However, after downloading I realized that now my editor doesn't work. It doesn't auto-load like usual; it asks for the HoI 2 root directory. No matter what I enter, it says "expected component to be a closure in line 1396" or "cannot open file C:/Program Files/Paradox Interactive/Doomsday/config/ whatever directory i've entered"

I'm probably just choosing the wrong root directory... but I've tried just about all of them.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

 

[safferli]

The issue here is that initial testing has determined that the game is not balanced. The US and its allies have the advantage of several 5-tech slot allies that can trade blueprints, whereas the Soviet Union has to bear the weight of the alliance alone. (They had Communist China from 1953 to about 1960 but they had very little to give technology-wise). I'm still going to be careful to preserve the US advantage in naval (especially carrier), electronics, marines, and management-related technologies, which is where they were clearly better. But the historical experience is that the Soviets achieved near-parity in key areas, concentrating on the military at the expense of industry. I'm for example NOT going to give the Soviets anything like IG Farben, and I don't mind if they are behind in industrial technology as long as they can stay within striking range in some areas.

The Soviets did have the unexploited opportunity of resource industrialist and theoretical scientist armaments ministers.

The Soviets never ruled the waves, but later in the Cold War were able to present a significant challenge with their missile cruisers.

In many cases what they did was to copy designs of the West. They actually knew they were behind and concentrated on putting on as credible bluff.

Yes, I agree with you fully here. Additionally, you could do a second (or even third) random event for the USSR, that duplicates the "blueprint stolen" event from vanilla. This way, the USSR will get the occasional boost in technology and it's "realistic".

 

[ozman2]

I'm trying a new game right now. Few things I've noticed as of `46:

-India doesn't have an IC mod like the readme says. It still has 100/80 IC and I think thats a bit ridiculous, but maybe it's historical

-No more issues with getting Nationalist leaders during the cease fire event so thats great

-The units Commie China gets in many of the events are 1918 infantry. Is this intentional? I figure `36 or `39 might me more appropriate at least, unless its suppose to represent under-trained units...

And one question:

-Is there a surrender event for Commie China when they conquer most of the mainland? I remember in 1.2 I had to literally conquer everything and annex the Nationalists, including taking Taiwan. If not, is there any possibility of making an event so the nationalists can still exist on Taiwan? If someone can give me some ideas for what could trigger such an event I could write it. I just don't know alot about the civil war to determine what could end it.

Re: India I will have to check that out.
Re: Commie China getting 1918 infantry is intentional. This represents raw recruits with poor equipment who when upgraded with time become quite powerful. I don't want the Commies to win too quickly.
Re: In 0.13 the CCIP event where the "Nationalists flee the Mainland" is supposed to trigger. That was not enabled in 0.12 because the needed precursor events were not in the event history. If it is not working in 0.13 let me know.

Try playing the Nationalist side. You should be able to annex the Commies if you refuse the cease fire.

Hey,
I downloaded .12a and love the new tech tree. However, after downloading I realized that now my editor doesn't work. It doesn't auto-load like usual; it asks for the HoI 2 root directory. No matter what I enter, it says "expected component to be a closure in line 1396" or "cannot open file C:/Program Files/Paradox Interactive/Doomsday/config/ whatever directory i've entered"

I'm probably just choosing the wrong root directory... but I've tried just about all of them.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

I'm going to guess the editor sees something about the game it doesn't like. After all this is a mod--it's not vanilla. You don't really need the editor. I've redefined some of the naval brigades, and this is probably what it doesn't like. Also try 0.13 and see if your problem is fixed.

Yes, I agree with you fully here. Additionally, you could do a second (or even third) random event for the USSR, that duplicates the "blueprint stolen" event from vanilla. This way, the USSR will get the occasional boost in technology and it's "realistic".

There are several random events for the USSR and its allies to steal blueprints. They are persistent so they should repeat periodically. Let me know if the frequency is too high or too low.

 

[safferli]

There are several random events for the USSR and its allies to steal blueprints. They are persistent so they should repeat periodically. Let me know if the frequency is too high or too low.

I'll have a go at a USSR game this weekend then!