Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

DD Tech tree and Naval Combat Improvement mod

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.
Excellent, thanks for a very comprehensive bugreport!

BritNavFan said:
None of the countries I checked (Germany, France, Britain, Japan, Australia) started with any transport ship techs.
Click to expand...
Fixed it for Britain and Japan. None of the other countries you mention should have any at that time.

German OB: Scharnhorst and Gneisenau are classified as pocket battleships. They probably need to be upgraded to battlecruiser model 4 (which they are in 1941 scenario).

The Germans do not have the pocket battleship tech, and probably ;) should.
Click to expand...
Fixed.

The Germans are building Graf Zeppelin and its CAG, but they have technology for neither. Historically, they completed the ship, so they should probably have the tech for it in 1939. On the other hand, it seems a fair representation of history for them not to have the tech for the CAG, but in that case they shouldn't be building one.

The French also have no carrier-related techs, although they have a completed carrier.
Click to expand...
The first carrier tech is extremely difficult to research, to prevent countries without carriers from quickly building a carrier navy. Only Britain, Japan and the US have it.

Rename the Deutschland "Lutzow", since she was historically renamed that a few days after the war started.
Click to expand...
Fixed.

CTD on loading the scenario (as Germany) due to a problem ("Unknown variable in Development") at line 3116? ("brigade-development={", whitespace is almost certainly different) of jap_41.inc

Note: every time I play the 1941 scenario I modify chi_41.inc by giving the Nationalist Chinese techs 5080, 5090, and 5100. They have all of these techs in the '39 scenario, so this is probably a bug on Paradox' part. 5080 is the tech that enables troops to dig in, which makes the conquest of China *very easy* for the Japanese in this scenario.
Click to expand...
Fixed.

Model viewer: The French CB-4 should be named "Dunkerque-class" while CB-3 can go unnamed. As it is, any pocket battleships the French build will be "Dunkerque-class" while the Dunkerque is doomed to be an "Improved Battlecruiser".

Akagi and Kaga are considered Soryu-class carriers in this scenario. They should probably be Akagi-class, as they are in other scenarios.

Rename "1 Koku Sentai" "Hosho". Hosho dated from 1921, but she's not in the 1936 OB.
Click to expand...
Fixed.

I'm not sure whether Chitose and Chiyoda should be in the 1936 OB, but Shoho and Zuiho should be there and aren't so those can be renamed as well.
Click to expand...
Do you think those last two should be added and if so, what class should they be?

Hosho should probably be a CV-0 rather than a CVL-0 (check out Paradox' name for the Japanese CV-0 class).
Click to expand...
It already is, in the '36 scenario.


Ideas: the Japanese should probably start this scenario with Yamato, Musashi, Shokaku, and Zuikaku under construction. It's probably reasonable to delete the "Koku Sentai" unit, since it seems to be a HoI2 representation of what are considered "light carriers" in Doomsday.

Classify the Mogami class as CA's. (Although it's historically accurate that they were CL's in 1939, by the time they actually saw battle they were CA's, and since the game does not allow for conversion, representing them as CA's from the start is the easiest fix.)
Click to expand...
I'll keep these parts of your post in mind. I may add those ships under construction if I feel like researching when those ships were historically finished.
 
Hosho's not in the 1939 or 1941 scenarios, but the fact that she survived the war (with no war record) indicates that not representing her as a combatant is probably fair.

According to history.navy.mil, Yamato was commissioned "just over a week after the start of the Pacific war" (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japsh-xz/yamato.htm). According to Akira Yoshimura ("Battleship Musashi"), the shipyard building Musashi learned that Yamato was completed on December 16, 1941. To finish on this date she needs to be started on 27-Mar-1939. Musashi was commissioned, according to the same source, on 5-Aug-1942, and needs to be started on 14-Nov-1939 to make this date. (As a purely historic note, she was actually officially started on 29-Mar-1938!)

Shokaku was completed on 2-Jun-1941, Zuikaku 7-Nov-1941, according to http://www.voodoo.cz/ww2car/jap.html. These dates require start dates of 26-Oct-1938 and 2-Apr-1939 respectively. Both participated at Pearl Harbour, one month after the given completion date for Zuikaku.

I was wrong about Shoho and Zuiho - scratch that comment.
 
BritNavFan said:
Shokaku was completed on 2-Jun-1941, Zuikaku 7-Nov-1941, according to http://www.voodoo.cz/ww2car/jap.html. These dates require start dates of 26-Oct-1938 and 2-Apr-1939 respectively. Both participated at Pearl Harbour, one month after the given completion date for Zuikaku.
Click to expand...
The ships are included in the '41 scenario. For '39, including slider effects, only Shokaku needs to be included. Yamato can be built faster and cheaper at the start of '39 scenario than if she's included in the construction que.

Banzored! said:
So v061 includes the fixes to the problems BritNavFan just mentioned?
Click to expand...
No, but they and a few other fixes will be inlcuded in 061b which will be up shortly.
 
Unfortunately I seem to get a bug with the 1941 scenario originating in whatever Japan is building whenever I launch it, something about building an invalid brigade, stopping me from being able to run the scenario.
Other than that, I do love the mod and have been playing with it for some time.
 
egslim said:
If you would like to help, I appreciate any of the following:
Feedback on (possible) bugs.
Feedback on the outcome of naval battles, to check balance. AI vs AI seems to work ok, but human play may be different.
Additional unit/country-specific model/minister/leader names, and likewise pictures that can be added to the Paradox-provided ones.
Click to expand...
I enjoy this mod immensely...is any work still being done on it? If so I will provide some feedback on my last few campaigns.
 
Is there a possibility of making this mod work with EmKeiEn?
 
Why do the assembly line techs increase the build time of units?

And I would like to know why the ranges of sea units are abysmally low? 500 for Great War Air Carrier??? The coal/oil capacities of ships is irrelevant when calculating range. When ships ran low on fuel, coalers and oilers would be routed to them, effectively giving unlimited range. See for reference the cruise of the Emden in WWI, milch-cows, British convoy oilers (that enabled fleet destroyers to be used for escort roles) and the careers of Germany's merchant raiders (some of which made it to Australia!). This handicap is especially unfair when the AI gets unlimited range.

BTW the first ASW Destroyer model has a too high top speed. The Flower-class corvette corresponding to this had a max speed of 16 knots, not the 25 (if I recall correctly) in this mod.
 
This mod is incredible. I've always been focused on naval strategy since my favorite nation is either the UK or JAP (multiplayer) and the changes done to accomodate new tactics and ship models are very nice. My only wish is for the ground combat to get a reworking as the naval combat did, but I'm more then satisfied with this as it is.
 
Coda A27 said:
I'm curious, what's the tech that unlocks "Very Long Transport" for Japan? I didn't see any techs which unlocked the Tech in any of the Naval Doctrine descriptions, and the 600km difference would be a big boon.
Click to expand...
A quick look at the file shows the following techs needed:

'40 Indirect Strike Doctrine
'44 Maritime Power Projection Doctrine
'47 Combined Fleet Operations

Not that I'll ever get there in my current game as Germany...I'm still working on the '44 Mahanian Appreciation Doctrine heh. BTW, this mod works well with the Unofficial SMEP - I just wish they were both still being worked on.
 
I reinstalled DD recently and am wondering how compatible this is with Armageddon. I'll try updating the naval units with brigades but haven't played Armageddon enough to see if there's any other major difference in techs which would be replaced by this mod.
 
new update anytime soon?

I would very much like you to edit your mod for use with the new armeggon mod the main item i noticed was now navy brigades or there tech tree but i love the pocket battle ship idea you used i one item that really chapped my butt was the way they used graf spee as a hipper class cruiser great work.
 
If you take the Armageddon AI files and replace the tech preference/ignore sections with those in the Naval mod I expect they will be perfectly compattible.

That would ignore the new brigades, though.
 
tech tree for armeggedon files

the mod works fine with all your stuff the only items that dont seem to work is the new naval brigades i assume that because they need to be added into your tech tree mod the files are there and the production screen even shows that you can have them but says you have not developed the technology for the tech im not sure how to add the tech into the tech tree development if you steer me in the right direction i play with it. once agian nice work on this




egslim said:
If you take the Armageddon AI files and replace the tech preference/ignore sections with those in the Naval mod I expect they will be perfectly compattible.

That would ignore the new brigades, though.
Click to expand...
 
Saulot333 said:
If someone really succeds in reviving this great mod please let us download the new version!
Click to expand...
Agreed, please someone make it Armageddon compaditble!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back