Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Cold War Tech Tree Extension Project

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Nukes are enabled in the mod through nuclear authorization. You need to be at war, have a nuke produced, and satisfy other conditions to get the authorization event. This was designed to roughly simulate the reluctance to use these weapons in the Cold War. You can choose your authorization rules in most scenarios 24 hours after the scenario loads.
The default rule is: 1) (historical) If you have a nuclear monopoly, (nobody outside your alliance has the technology) you get to use them simply by being at war, and having a nuke produced. 2) If the monopoly has been broken, you only get to use them if you've lost territory or are at war with someone who has authorized their use. The alternatives are A) always go with rule 1, regardless of nuclear monopoly or B) always go with rule 2, regardless of nuclear monopoly.

If you are a minor country, you might need to edit yourself into the nuclear club (99 countries). For full details see the file 'readme_nuclear_auth.txt'.
 
Last edited:
The reason for the big difference is to simulate having a nuke on board without actually producing them. It's to get around the fixed rate of nuke production. One of the consequences of the fixed rate of nuclear production is that if you have a number of small nuclear-capable states as enemies they can actually outproduce you!
 
nomonhan said:
Nukes are enabled in the mod through nuclear authorization. You need to be at war, have a nuke produced, and satisfy other conditions to get the authorization event. This was designed to roughly simulate the reluctance to use these weapons in the Cold War. You can choose your authorization rules in most scenarios 24 hours after the scenario loads.
The default rule is: 1) (historical) If you have a nuclear monopoly, (nobody outside your alliance has the technology) you get to use them simply by being at war, and having a nuke produced. 2) If the monopoly has been broken, you only get to use them if you've lost territory or are at war with someone who has authorized their use. The alternatives are A) always go with rule 1, regardless of nuclear monopoly or B) always go with rule 2, regardless of nuclear monopoly.

If you are a minor country, you might need to edit yourself into the nuclear club (99 countries). For full details see the file 'readme_nuclear_auth.txt'.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but i should have clarified.

I am playing the vanilla '44 scenario as Germany. I think that that is what i causing it.

I discovered those events while sifting through the mod files, and I tried to manually trigger them using the console event cheats, but it didn't do anything when i entered them in.
 
Neoman said:
version 0.28 is out, its on the first post. I'd say the problem is fixed by now.
Click to expand...

Can i just override the old copy?
 
I've been thinking a bit about our earlier discussion about BCs and BBs and I'm wondering to what extent it can be justified having their techtree run up to the 60s? Given that the world stopped building battleships sortly before or during WW2, and started scrapping them en masse during the 50s and 60s
I mean the techtree that comes out with new models of course.

maybe it's better to shorten the tree, thus freeing up space for ship-classes that have continued existance (like subs, carriers, destroyers, etc).
At the same time the missile-tech (or something else / multiple something elses that fits the bill) tree could be expanded giving either fixed increases in firepower range, or (better I think) a new type of 'brigade' -again, if at all possible- that represents the addition of missile based modern weaponry. basically increasing the range of the battleship to represent cruise missiles and such, while not necessarily increasing damage (for balance)

(as always, I'm just thinking out loud.)
 
I think we should use the current amount of Battleship models. It is correct that since '41 (Pearl Harbor, HMS Repulse, etc.) it came in sight that the time of battleship comes to it end. So there weren't that much new constructions in the war.

But e.g. if the war against Japan had gone only one year longer we had the Montanas (5 Units authorized) on US Side as a new Generation of Superbattleships. Their were also plans to redesign the last Iowas with the Montana torpedo protection system into a upgraded Iowa-class.

Also the Japanese surely had tried to build more of their Yamatos. There also were plans for a even bigger Super-Yamato class (A-150).

The Germans had also a strong concern in super heavy units (e.g. the H-class and post H-class studies). So if they had won the war or beaten the Soviets, the oceans had seen some really big units. (Especially in the Fatherland-scenario).

In real history their were plans to convert the later Iowas in BBG (Guided Missile Battleship) [e.g. BBG-66 USS Kentucky), which then had served as heavy surface Group flagship with enormous AA and land attack abilities. (They would also been potent Carrier escorts). Other Nations surely had done the same classification, when they had the potential and money for such floating fortresses. They are somehow the counterpart to the modernized real world Iowas in their pure land fire support role.

In my opinion those BBGs would been logically units in a USA-Nazi/Nazi-Japan Cold War Scenario, as there would be a higher importance of sea-sea warfare. Not like in the real cold war where the Soviets never had the real ability to challenge the West with a equal blue water navy.

To simulate this progress and the conversion the later post war capital brigades should bring higher bonuses. Especially the AA SAM Brigade. Maybe the should bring a penalty on sea and land attack to simulate e.g. the switching from some main turrets to rocket weaponry. Later this penalty could be counterbalanced by newer models of fire control Brigades (New added Anti-Ship Missiles and Cruise Missiles) an the modern battleship hull.
Generally this later Brigades should be somehow more interesting to simulate FREMM and other radical Modernization programs and the highly potential step from canon to rocket weaponry in sea warfare.

I hope my remarks are somehow understandable ;)
 
Crazy_Ivan,
What you are thinking about already exists, The "computerized fire control" in its later brigade improvements becomes missile range improvement. Through the fire control brigade and the basic missile ship range improvement, the cruisers outrange the battleships until they get the "modern battleship upgrade". The missile range improvements are in the anti ship missiles section of secret weapons. Yes no battleships were built, but the USA did recommission the Iowa class ships it had for a while under Reagan. I presume that they put missiles and radar on board when they did, which is what the "modern battleship upgrade" means. As for battlecruisers no nation ever built a model 6 or model 7 battlecruiser and I'm pretty sure nobody ever built a level 5. Level's 8 and 9 of the battlecruisers are really the most advanced heavy missile cruisers, and are placed in the battlecruiser category because of the 10 model limit bug. The only consequence is that the can have one extra attachment--but why not for the kings of the missile cruiser class? Unfortunately there's a graphic bug in the executable if you try to define more than 10 division models, though there is no limit on brigades. 10 models are already used for battleship, so no more are possible anyway. So there is no extension of the tech tree for either battleships or battlecruisers except for the 'modern battleship upgrade'.

Le-Boehm
Check out the range stats and all the improvements--"modern battleship upgrade" (an improvement of the "capital improved hull") is the equivalent of guided missile battleships.
From the file 'naval_improved hull_l.txt'

# 2 - Battleship Modernization--installs missiles and electronic battlefield on battleship
model = {
cost = 6 # not cheap
buildtime = 760 # same as battleship
manpower = 0.5
surfacedetectioncapability = 2
airdetectioncapability = 2
subdetectioncapability = 1
airdefence = 5
seadefence = 5
seaattack = 2
convoyattack = 0
subattack = 2
airattack = 2
shorebombardment = 1
distance = 0.15 # adds range need capital fire control also to get 0.70
supplyconsumption = 0.5
fuelconsumption = 1
upgrade_time_factor = 1.0
upgrade_cost_factor = 1.0
}
##### modern battleship needs to be fully brigaded for maximum effect


humancalculator,
Clarify your problem please. If you are playing 44 scenario you most likely can't use nukes because they USA has them first. If you play extremely well and manage to not lose 10% of your national provinces then you can't use them unless the USA authorizes first. And they won't authorize if you've broken the nuclear monopoly before they have completed a nuke. To get around that, make sure event 629000 is in the sleepevent file and NOT in the history file (take it out by editing the savegame if needed). But beware! The USA can nuke you too! Is that really what you want? Or would you really just prefer your own nuclear program to knock some sense into the US war planners so they don't use them on you. Mutual nuclear fear was one of the main themes of the Fatherland novel.
 
Last edited:
Sorry if this has been allready askend but the intelligence system is not working on 1.3 BETA 2. It does not show percentage as in vanilla.
So what files mod intelligence system?
ps. I juts love the tech tree :D
 
Sibbe said:
Sorry if this has been allready askend but the intelligence system is not working on 1.3 BETA 2. It does not show percentage as in vanilla.
So what files mod intelligence system?
ps. I juts love the tech tree :D
Click to expand...

Did you apply the Armageddon Patch? If not, do so. You find it in the folder called "zpatch_arma13"..
 
Hey nomonhan. With DAIM and SMEP along with your mod all set up for the Beta patch, perhaps you guys could get with Rodrico Stak and get that combo mod up and running. It would be an awesome combination. Thanks.
 
What I will do is to include instructions on DAIM. It is up to Rodrico Stak to make a combo mod.

The instructions on SMEP-DAIM would be
1) Install vanilla Arma 1.3 beta 2
2) Overwrite with SMEP
3) Overwrite with Cold War Tech Tree
4) Extract DAIM files overwriting as necessary any files EXCEPT
--do not extract any scenario files from DAIM. (yet)
5. IN DAIM rename the 1936 scenario_1936A.eug
Modify the scenario_1936A.eug file you just created (by renaming) as follows:
a) replace the second line by:
panel = "scenarios/data/scenario_1936A.bmp"
(that gives 1936 User mod panel)
b) Add two lines to the scenario_1936A.eug file:
event = "db\events_vl\nuclear_weapons.txt"#nuclear authorization
include = "scenarios\1945\als.inc" #map mod patch for International Community
#not used by SMEP-DAIM but including this avoids scenario error message
6)FINALLY overwrite the existing 1936A.eug file with the DAIM-modified version you just created.
7) If any event number conflicts between SMEP and DAIM are present you will have to resolve them -- if you do not get an error message on load that an event ID has already been used then there is no conflict.

Although DAIM is defined for the 1936, 38 and 39 scenarios, the SMEP-DAIM combo is only defined for 1936.
 
Rodrico is having a problem with his anthology cd. He says he cannot get a copy to update to 1.3 beta:(
 
Just a playtest on .28's Cold War scenario...

I picked my usual setup of USA and early Germany/Korea/Japan setup, I did eventually enlist India in the alliance. Communist China defeated the Nationalists after the Berlin Airlift event, and consolidated power by 1949, as well as declaring war on Laos for some unexplained reason. The Marshall Plan events fired correctly as far as I could tell. By 1953 when the Korean War had not started, I edited my save to remove the Laotian war, and the Korean war events fired the following day. As usual, I chose total war and nuclear weapons. As I steamrolled North Korea, East Germany, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, the Soviets nuked two Japanese cities. In retaliation, I nuked Vladivostok, Moscow, Kiev, Stalingrad, and Leningrad. They nuked a third Japanese city. Peace events fired when South Korea annexed North Korea, as usual.

Oh, as an aside...

Remember that USA inc file I sent you a while ago for the Cold War scenario, are you planning on using it in the future?
 
cpl_hicks,
I always look forward to your reports as you have a knack for telling me what I need to know. That's really wacko having Communist China throw a monkey wrench in the whole affair by DOWing Laos. Maybe it's just a one time fluke and something needed to keep the game from being boring all the time. Or maybe it's a recurrent thing. Time will tell. Anyway I must have forgotten about or misplaced your USA inc file. Would you mind posting a link to that again?

How did the Marshall Plan go? Without the Korean War Europe might have gotten their full 5 years of US aid.
 
nomonhan said:
The reason for the big difference is to simulate having a nuke on board without actually producing them. It's to get around the fixed rate of nuke production. One of the consequences of the fixed rate of nuclear production is that if you have a number of small nuclear-capable states as enemies they can actually outproduce you!
Click to expand...
Would it be out of the question of adding an intermediate V2 missile between V2-3 and V2-4? My only real problem with the whole thing is the enormous leap that takes place in only a year(A missile with a range of 8000km, to one with a range of 15000km).

nomonhan said:
The mod goes to the end of 1969. But events have only been developed to about 1954.
Click to expand...
Does the game really go to 1969? I thought it ended on December 31 1963 like vanilla ARMA.

Though it does make sense, with so many of the techs having a historical year of 1963+.

nomonhan said:
On another matter, coreymas, Arma 1.3 patch project manager, has flatly said there will be no changes to the executable. In other words, beta 2 is a de facto final. Considering this, I'll still make 0.28 a 1.2-1.3 version. But would there be any objection if 0.29 is a 1.3 only version? I hate to hold back progress because the patch team is dragging its feet--word is that HOI3 will come out before HOI2 1.3 final.
Click to expand...
How reliable is the 1.3 patch? Does it contain any of the changes in the CDCP mod(such as the effectiveness of Airborne Assault dropping by 10%, where it should have increased)? If so, I'm all for it.:)

Edit: Just checked my files, and you have CDCP included in the mod.:eek:o
 
Actually one of my thoughts is to have the range of the missile boosted by a lesser amount and then tie the unlimited range to the nuclear missile submarine--since the game engine does not allow subs to be used as missile carriers this would be the proxy. Or there could be an extra step (essentially sub-orbital to orbital capability) and the effect of the nuclear missile sub would be to make the missiles cheaper.

The patch contains ALL of the CDCP improvements and then some.

Anyway I've had no requests so far to continue 1.2 so I expect 0.29 to be 1.3 only. Just in case there are any diehards, I'll continue to post links for 0.28 after 0.29 comes out--on the first page of the tech tree thread. If you're a 1.2 diehard you can set up 0.28 and just apply events only for future updates. One of the reasons is that keeping two versions has become increasingly difficult. In consolidating the versions I already uncovered a minor bug where something only got patched for 1.2 but not 1.3. AI files are becoming increasingly important and they are structured differently in 1.2 and 1.3.

cpl_hicks, I notice you always a historically release Germany, Japan and Korea early when playing USA. Would it help if I gave the USA a 10% higher peacetime IC mod, to be dropped by 4% on Germany's release, 4% on Japan's release and 2% on Korea's release?
 
I would like to help you with some small flavor things like model (also pics) and unitnames.

As a Beginning I have some proposals for the USA:

1.) Navy:

Battleships

  • 1941 => Iowa-Class
  • 1945 => BB-72 Class [7 units planned in 1942],
  • or => Illinois-Class [from Illinois it was planned to integrate the defence of the montanas against torpedos, etc.]
  • or => Super-Iowa [As fictive second and upgraded wave/bloc of Iowas]
  • 1948 => BBG-66/Kentucky-class [To BBG upgraded Iowa-units]

    Super Heavy
  • 1938 => Montana
  • 1945 => Super-Montana/BB-79 [As there where seven BB-72s (to BB-78) planned] (irl there were plans for an improved Montana)

    Nuclear
  • 1948 => BBGN-xx Arizona-class [in honor of BB-39?]


    Carrier
  • 1918 => Langley-class
  • 1933 => Lexington-class
  • 1936 => Yorktown-class
  • 1938 => Wasp-class
  • 1941 => Essex-class
  • 1943 => Ticonderoga-class/Long-Essex
  • 1945 => Midway-class
  • 1952 => Forestall-class
  • 1957 => Kitty Hawk-class
  • 1957 => CVN Enterprise-class

    Those proposals just roughly fit in the existing scheme but should be a good compromise. Midway clearly is an design from '45 not '43 and the United States-class would be an carrier for strategic nuclear armed bombers and no regular fleet carrier.


    Light Carriers
  • 1936 => Ranger-class
  • 1939 => Long Island-class
  • 1941 => Independence-class
  • 1943 => Casablanca-class
  • 1945 => Saipan-class
  • 1948 =>
  • 1955 => ASW => Essex-class CVS
  • 1960 => CVLN =>

    Also a somehow wild mix between CVL, CVE and CVS to fill the gasps...
    Saipan is clearly post '43, Langley to early and to big to be a cvl.
    No idea for '48 or the CVLN....


    Heavy Cruisers:
  • 1918 => New York-class
  • 1933 => Portland-class
  • 1936 => New Orleans-class
  • 1938 => Wichita-class
  • 1941 => Baltimore-class
  • 1945 => Oregon City-Class
  • 1949 => Des Moines-Class
  • 1951 => Nuclear =>

    Missile Cruiser
  • 1955 => Boston-class
  • 1960 => Nuclear =>

    Super Missile Cruiser
  • 1959 =>
  • 1962 => Nuclear =>

    I'm not sure if we need the secret weapons CAN and BCN units as they are simulated in your extended tech tree through the later BC and CA models. With one unit more we could simulate the transition to CAG/CG smoother with Des Moines the last conventional CA then Boston/Albany as transformed unit and maybe a fictive conventional CG/Super CG as conclusion.

    Parallel a CAGN/CGN way with the super missile cruisers as conclusion. Roughly e.g.:
  • 1951 => CAN/CAGN [fictive]
  • 1960 => Long Beach
  • 1962 => Bainbridge
  • 1965 => Truxtun [CGN-42/Virginia is too wide into the seventies.]

    A Problem is the cruiser gap were cg(n)/ddg(n) units were new classified. [Truxtun was first a DLGN then CGN]

Just my 32 cents ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back