• 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.

hellfish6

Nuke the site from orbit.
93 Badges
Jan 21, 2003
1.215
8
nope.nope.com
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
For the past couple weeks I've been tinkering with some ideas of how to revamp the units for HoI3.

1. Purpose

I love Hoi2. However, I've always thought that combat - the core element of the game, was pretty generic. Any two countries will have the opportunity to construct the exact same divisions - combat more a matter of research capability to see who gets the newer technology first than it is a matter of showing how the different countries organized and fought with their militaries. I understand that the doctrines were supposed to be the deciding factor to explain why the Germans could outperform the Poles, British and French early in the war. This, in my humble opinion, is insufficient.

The CORE and HIP mods make an attempt to rectify this - CORE offers "small" divisions for the countries that had them (i.e. Italy) and HIP offers differing costs for divisions based upon historical values (Japanese divisions are cheaper to build than American divisions). As well intentioned as these systems are, they exist in a flawed context and are merely stop-gap measures to fill a void in a system that doesn't properly simulate national military strategies. In the end, the divisions are still generic.

2. Proposal

I've made an excel file outlining the most common types of military components that make a division in WWII. My proposal is that the player, who can often spend long stretches of game time doing nothing, be allowed to create his/her own customized divisions. Of course, there should be templates and default divisional structures available for those that don't want to make their own.

The idea is that you start with a group of components - hereafter referred to as battalions - and assemble your divisions from them. As you discover new technology, your gain access to additional battalions to build and your existing battalions become eligible for upgrades.

3. How It Works

The following is a basic list of battalions that were widely available in 1936:

Code:
HQ and Staff Cadre

Militia Bn
Garrison Bn
MP Bn
Lt Inf Bn
Inf Bn
Marine Bn
Mountain Bn
Machinegun Bn
Engineer Bn
Recon Bn

Lt Cavalry Bn
Cavalry Bn
Lt Armored Car Bn

Tankette/Lt Inf Tank Bn
Lt Tank Bn
Med Tank Bn
Heavy Tank Bn

Lt Artillery Bn
Med Artillery Bn
Heavy Artillery Bn
Mortar Bn
Heavy Mortar Bn
Lt AA Bn
AA Bn
Heavy AA Bn

Signal Bn
Medical Bn
Horse Transport Bn
Motor Transport Bn
Logistics Bn

The following battalions are unlocked after the discovery of the relevant technology:

Code:
Airborne Bn
Glider Bn
Mechanized Bn
Lt Mechanized Bn
Mech Engineer Bn
Commando Bn
Airborne Commando Bn

Med Armored Car Bn
Heavy Armored Car Bn
Motor Cavalry Bn
Armored Cavalry Bn
Helicopter Recon Bn

Medium Infantry Tank Bn
Heavy Infantry Tank Bn
Medium Assault Tank Bn
Heavy Assault Tank Bn
Superheavy Assault Tank Bn
Superheavy Tank Bn
Amphibious Tank Bn
Airborne Tank Bn
Main Battle Tank Bn

Lt Antitank Bn (towed)
Antitank Bn (towed)
Lt SP Tank Destroyer Bn
SP Tank Destroyer Bn
Heavy SP Tank Destroyer Bn
Medium SP Artillery Bn
Heavy SP Artillery Bn
Superheavy SP Artillery Bn
Rocket Bn (towed)
SP Rocket Bn
Heavy SP Rocket Bn
Lt SP AA Bn
Medium SP AA Bn
Heavy SP AA Bn

Heavy Motor Transport Bn
Helo Transport Bn
Ordnance Bn
Amphibious Transport Bn
Armored Amphib Transport Bn

Each battalion has specific costs, benefits, stats and modifiers that when combined into a divisional structure affect the entire organization - some of these are cumulative effects, some of them are total effects (i.e. HA value of a division is a cumulative effect from all the battalions, however a single motor transport battalion increases the speed of the entire division itself). A division composed entirely of infantry and artillery will be a slow, ponderous unit. Add a signal battalion and a motor transport battalion to the divisional structure and it may lost some of its attack/defense value, but the organization level and speed of the division increases greatly. For some countries, this was important. For others, they'd have preferred the extra infantry and artillery instead of mobility and organization. This ought to be reflected in the game.

Another example - US Armored divisions were actually pretty small. While most German panzer divisions had at least two panzer battalions and over a half dozen motorized or mechanized battalions, US armored divisions had three tank, three mechanized and three artillery battalions. While the US division was a bit weaker on paper than the German division, the difference was that US divisions were much easier to transport across oceans and, arguably, more nimble and flexible than their German counterparts.

A custom division system will let players have the ability to make the game more their own. If a player wants to build a division entirely equipped with heavy tank battalions, let him - he'll soon find out why nobody ever did this in real life. The cost is very high and the division will be, essentially, totally unsupported by infantry and artillery.

However, a more realistically minded player might want to give his airborne divisions a bit more punch - swapping out some parachute battalions for glider battalions. Add an airborne tank battalion. Such a divisional structure would suit his purposes and gaming style better than a generic division. Likewise if a player wants to add some amphibious tanks to his marine division or create an Army Headquarters division with additional artillery and air defense units to support his attacks, he can. This goes well beyond the current brigade system and is vastly more flexible and personal.

Attached is a sample screen to construct a division. Since its still theory, its not fully hashed out. I gave each division 15 battalion slots, as this seemed pretty standard across the board for real life divisions. The divisional HQ is standard and represents the commander and his staff. It is a "free" battalion.

1battalion2jpglj7.jpg


This is just a sample armored division I created. I borrowed the pallete and unit symbols from TOAW3, and they are not necessarily indicative of all the kinds of units that can/should be available.


When I have more time, I'll make some historical examples of divisions to further illustrate the system.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I think the number of battalions hellfish6 wroted is too high :eek:)
It should be simplified a little bit:

Infantry bns:
Light
Regular
Motor Infantry
Mech Infantry
Marine
Mountain
Airborne
Heavy Wpns (aded hvy mortars, MGs and so, fully mobile)
Garrison (greatly decreasing movment of division, if moving or attacking it will have lowered power-attack numbers)
Militia

Artillery bns:
Hvy Mortars
Light
Medium
Heavy
Rocket
AA
AT
(all were mobile in fact)

Armored bns:
Light
Medium
Heavy
Assault guns
Tank Destroyer
Heavy TD
Recon (there is no need for dividing this to cavalry, armores cavalry, armored car, mechanized infantry recon units... recon was done by all what was at hand)

Others:
Engineers (In fact they were mobile)
HQ Staff
Medical (for men)
Repair (for vehicles)
Amphibious (LCT, LCI, LCVP... to any regiment with 2 btns attacking, third in reserve got 1 amphibious batallions - so 2 for division two regiments attacking, third embarked on bigger ships like LST)
Recon (like spys, recon aircrafts, captured enemy soldiers and so)
Police

adding another trucks or Mechs is not needed I think
specialized units like commandos, rangers and so were not designed to serve as normal infantry battalions while many leaders used them so depriving them of their shock, surprise, supperior training and special abilities resulting in heavy cassualties amongst them
(In other words in the HOI2 map they are useless)
 
Last edited:
HMS Enterprize said:
This was why I was advocating the brigade level. The afrika campaign is a good example- this battle was fought with many brigades making moves etc etc

One detail: Whole british army was organized in so called Brigade level. In fact british brigade was the same as regiment in other armies.
In the western dessert "brigade level" fighting was made by attaching divisional Artillery and other independet units to brigades making them stronger and more independent on a division making them more maneuvrable and more vulnerable if spread in the waste space of desert

For Example: 51st Infantry divison in normandy, june 1944:
HQ
152nd Infantry Brigade:
2nd bn, Seaforth Highlanders
5th bn, Seaforth Highlanders
5th bn, Queens Own Cameron Highlanders
153rd Infantry Brigade:
5th bn, Black Watch
1st bn, Gordon Highlanders
5-7th bn, Gordon Highlanders (one batallion)
154th Infantry Brigade:
1st bn, Black Watch
7th bn, Black Watch
7th bn, Argh and Suth Highlanders
1-7th bn, Middleessex (independent divisional battalion)
2nd Derbyshire Yeomanry R.A.C (Royal Armored corps?)
126th Field Artillery regiment (24guns)
127th Field Artillery regiment (24guns)
128th Field Artillery regiment (24guns)
61st AT regiment (32 AT guns)
Divisional Engeneers bn

2nd US Infantry division, normandy, june 1944:
HQ
9th Infantry Regiment:
1/9th Infantry bn
2/9th Infantry bn
3/9th Infantry bn
AT/9 (12 Guns)
23rd Infantry Regiment:
1/23rd Infantry bn
2/23rd Infantry bn
3/23rd Infantry bn
AT/23 (12 Guns)
38th Infantry Regiment:
1/38th Infantry bn
2/38th Infantry bn
3/38th Infantry bn
AT/38 (12 Guns)
15th Field artillery bn (12x 105)
37th Field artillery bn (12x 105)
38th Field artillery bn (12x 105)
12th Field artillery bn (12x 155)
2nd Engineer bn
2nd Recon Troop (mechanized)
Attached units:
741st Tank bn ( 36 medium + 15 light tanks)
612nd TD (Towed) bn (36 AT guns)
 
Last edited:
This is great idea, though i think it should be implemented on a larger scale - as other mentioned e.g. regiments.

I think it would be great to see this scheme implemented on a corps and army level where organisation is getting better, the longer the structure of the corps and their leaders stays the same and chances of events like counter attacks etc... are increasing, reflecting the fact that the key persons of the chain of command know each other!
 
Idea: you let players custom deisgn their own divisions... but then it has to be researched. Nothing to expensive research wise, but the different components have to be adjusted to a greater whole in detail. Just so that we have some consistency maybe.
 
hellfish6 said:
Absolutely. The German division templates should be similar to the historical German divisions. Likewise all other nationalities - or at least the majors like Germany, UK, USA, France, Soviet Union, Japan, Italy - should have their own unique, historical templates too.

I like this idea - and also the idea with the batallions makes sense if u take a look at euIII where battles are also resolved at a smaller scale (if u can trust the screenshots)

I think the battle resolution used in euIII could be implemented in HOI III, too, with some refinements. (this may be a compromise between provinceless combats and completely abstract battles)
 
I'm soliciting you guys for more ideas about 'build your own ships'. I'm trying to think of the best way it could be implemented. Here are my ideas so far:

1. Hull size

Pretty much what I described earlier. Research gives you hull sizes (i.e. early cruiser, basic cruiser, improved cruiser, advanced cruiser, etc.). The hulls determine the basic armor and speed of the ship. In other words, an early cruiser might offer a 30 value for sea defense, 1500km range, 20 km/h speed and maybe 3000 ton allowance for armament.

With that 3000 ton allowance, you can buy gun turrets, AA mounts, torpedo launchers, sea planes, radars, etc. The costs of the armament would be balanced, so you couldn't have a cruiser with 20 battleship guns.

The advantage I see in this system is that its pretty basic and simple. You just put the guns on the boat, make 20 boats, and you're done. No need to worry about adding armor, better engines, etc. that might bog your interest down.

2. Clean slate

You pick the hull size (between 1000-100,000 tons) and you pick everything that goes into it. I imagine it might cost 1 IC or so for each 1000 tons (meaning a 100,000 ton battleship will cost 100 IC).

The weight of the ship determines the number and kinds of weapons you put onto it. A 5000 ton light cruiser can't carry a triple 203mm gun turret because that particular turret has an 8000 ton minimum weight.

You fill up that 5000 ton ship with 5000 tons worth of things - fuel tanks to increase range, engines to determine speed, weapons, sensors, etc.

The plus side is that you can totally customize your ship. The down is that it can be a really long, drawn out process to do so.

Any other ideas?
 
hellfish6 said:
I'm soliciting you guys for more ideas about 'build your own ships'. I'm trying to think of the best way it could be implemented. Here are my ideas so far:

1. Hull size

Pretty much what I described earlier. Research gives you hull sizes (i.e. early cruiser, basic cruiser, improved cruiser, advanced cruiser, etc.). The hulls determine the basic armor and speed of the ship. In other words, an early cruiser might offer a 30 value for sea defense, 1500km range, 20 km/h speed and maybe 3000 ton allowance for armament.

With that 3000 ton allowance, you can buy gun turrets, AA mounts, torpedo launchers, sea planes, radars, etc. The costs of the armament would be balanced, so you couldn't have a cruiser with 20 battleship guns.

The advantage I see in this system is that its pretty basic and simple. You just put the guns on the boat, make 20 boats, and you're done. No need to worry about adding armor, better engines, etc. that might bog your interest down.

2. Clean slate

You pick the hull size (between 1000-100,000 tons) and you pick everything that goes into it. I imagine it might cost 1 IC or so for each 1000 tons (meaning a 100,000 ton battleship will cost 100 IC).

The weight of the ship determines the number and kinds of weapons you put onto it. A 5000 ton light cruiser can't carry a triple 203mm gun turret because that particular turret has an 8000 ton minimum weight.

You fill up that 5000 ton ship with 5000 tons worth of things - fuel tanks to increase range, engines to determine speed, weapons, sensors, etc.

The plus side is that you can totally customize your ship. The down is that it can be a really long, drawn out process to do so.

Any other ideas?

As you say- could get quite complicated but I think some would apprecaite it.

Research would have to have a pretty big overhaul also as no-one would be researching a bismarck class for example...

Im not sure the IC ratio thing would work either...at 100IC for a BB, dont think many states would be building them! :rofl:
 
HMS Enterprize said:
As you say- could get quite complicated but I think some would apprecaite it.

Research would have to have a pretty big overhaul also as no-one would be researching a bismarck class for example...

Im not sure the IC ratio thing would work either...at 100IC for a BB, dont think many states would be building them! :rofl:

Hehe, yeah, for a 100,000 ton BB. Most others would be cheaper. :)

I don't think the tech tree overhaul would be that drastic.

For example, you research Early Light Cruiser. Once the tech team is done, you get the following build components:

Hulls
5,000 ton hull (speed: 24, range: 1500, sea defense: 30, 2000 ton armament, 250 day build time, 5 IC)
5,500 ton hull (speed 22, range: 2000, sea defense: 32, 2500 ton armament, 260 day build time, 5 IC)

Weapons
twin 6" turret (sea attack: 10, engagment range: 20, 500 ton cost)
quad torpedo launcher (sea attack: 15, engagement range: 10, 300 ton cost)
twin 40mm AA (air attack: 3, air defense: 5, 100 ton cost)
light seaplane catapult (detection range: 100, 750 ton cost)

Now you can use up that allowance to equip the ship with any of these weapons, or with any other weapons you've researched (and likewise, if you research an advanced battleship, you could add any of the weapons that came with the early light cruiser research too).

Its all a matter of tagging components and hulls to their relevant techs.
 
little bit complicated i think. And unrealistic too.
The basic hull design for ships was developed before and in WW1. There were some advances of hydrodynamics but they were of minor character. The thing that make the difference was engines. In WW1 the ships was coal powered mainly. New engines were lighter, gave more power with less fuel consumption.
This allowed the same hull faster, better armored and with greater range. Last big hull design revolution was just tested at Battle of Hampton Roads, on March 8 and March 9, 1862 USS Monitor vs CSS Virginia :eek:

So building ships on different hull designs is not the right idea, but I cant think anything better :eek:

My vision of how it should work:
you want an unsinkable ship? add a 30x+1armor and this ship will not sink anythink
you want an whatewer-sinking ship? add a 15x456mm main gun and your ship will sink as a first plane appears
you want an Flak-ship? ok, meeting with a standard equiped cruiser will be one sided :D

Pre war Destroyer hull:
capacity: 1400tons, armor 0 (DDs had no armor belts), max speed 45kts, range 2000nm
War design destroyer hull(improvements)1941-42-43 available:
capacity 2000tons, armor 1 (DDs had no armor belts, but better passive durability), max speed 45kts, range 3000nm
Late war design destroyers (45-? available):
capacity 2500tons, armor 2, max speed 45kts, range 4000nm

Pre war Light cruiser hull:
capacity 3000tons, armor 1, max speed 45kts, range 3000nm
War design Light cruiser hull:
capacity 5000tons, armor 2, max speed 50kts, range 4000nm
Late war Light cruiser hull:
capacity 7000tons, armor 3, max speed 50kts, range 5000nm

Pre war heavy cruiser hull:
capacity 6000tons, armor 3, max speed 60kts, range 4000nm
War design heavy cruiser hull:
capacity 10000tons, armor 4, max speed 65kts, range 5000nm
Late war heavy cruiser hull:
capacity 14000tons, armor 5, max speed 65kts, range 6000nm

Pre war Battle ships hull:*
capacity 25000tons, armor 5, max speed 70kts, range 5000nm
War design Battle ships hull:
capacity 35000tons, armor 6, max speed 80kts, range 6000nm
Late war Battle ships hull:
capacity 45000tons, armor 7, max speed 90kts, range 7000nm

Pre war fleet carrier hull:
capacity 20000tons, armor 3, max speed 60kts, range 5000nm
War design fleet carrier hull:
capacity 30000tons, armor 4, max speed 60kts, range 6000nm
Late war fleet carrier hull:
capacity 40000tons, armor 5, max speed 60kts, range 7000nm

Pre war esort carrier hull:
capacity 8000tons, armor 2, max speed 40kts, range 3000nm
War design escort carrier hull:
capacity 10000tons, armor 3, max speed 40kts, range 4000nm
Late war escort carrier hull:
capacity 12000tons, armor 4, max speed 40kts, range 5000nm

Other Ship hull: (tanker, cargo, troop, hilfskreuzer, minesweepers, minelayers, etc.)
capacity 8000tons, armor 0, max speed 20kts, range 10000nm
cargo capacity will be what remains - transport weight must be reworked for ground units in 5-7ships/division ratio (lets say every 1pwr ofdivision will need 40cargo capacity) and for supplies in 1000tons of cargo=1.0 of supplies(coal, metal, etc)

Subs hulls: (same armor, same speed, range +1000 increment or so)
700tons
750tons
800tons

available armaments:
456mm main gun (600tons, armor +5, speed -6kts, range -500nm, fire range 25nm, naval attack +7)
406mm main gun (500tons, armor +4, speed -5kts, range -400nm, fire range 23nm, naval attack +6)
356mm main gun (400tons, armor +3, speed -4kts, range -350nm, fire range 20nm, naval attack +5)
305mm main gun (300tons, armor +3, speed -3kts, range -300nm, fire range 18nm, naval attack +4)
203mm main gun (200tons, armor +2, speed -2.5kts, range -200nm, fire range 15nm, naval attack +3)
150mm main gun (100tons, armor +1(armored turrets), speed -2kts, range -100nm, fire range 12nm, naval attack +2)
127mm universal guns (80tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -80nm, fire range 11nm, naval attack +1.5)
105mm universal guns (60tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -70nm, fire range 10nm, naval attack +1.2)
90mm universal guns (50tons, armor +0, speed -0.5kts, range -50nm, fire range 6nm, naval attack +0.8)
40mm(37mm) AA gun (10tons, armor +0, speed -0.5kts, range -20nm, air attack +0.5)
20mm(25mm,12,7mm) AA gun (5tons, armor +0, speed -0.3kts, range -10nm, air attack +0.3)
Torpedo tube 533mm(100tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -100nm, naval attack +2.5)
Torpedo tube 610mm(japan only)(120tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -100nm, naval attack +3)**
Depth charges (100tons, armor +0, speed -0.5kts, range - 50nm, sub attack +1)
Hedgehog (150tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -50nm, sub attack +2)***
Mines (200tons, armor +0, speed -2kts, range -200nm, convoy interdiction +5)

other:
Searching Radar (100tons, armor +0, speed -0kts, range +200nm, spott +5)***
Aiming radar (200tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range +300nm, naval attack +50%)***
Early Sonar (100tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -50nm, sub detection +5)
Late sonar (150tons, armor +0, speed -1kts, range -100nm, sub detection +10)***
+1 armor (500 tons, speed -1kts, range -200nm),(aviable for ships larger then destroyer)
+1 Seaplane (250tons, armor +0, speed 0kts, range 0nm, spott +5)


* as battlecruisers were battleships with smaller main battery and armor, to gain speed they are in fact battleships...
** improving some naval techs (like magnetic fuse, electric power, reliability improvements) may add some bonuses to torpedo tubes
*** these techs would be available later in the game, coming with some research

I will let IC consuming calculations to others... :D
also the correction of araments costs, and values must be recalculated as i was only counting them for DDs hulls and max 150mm guns
 
Last edited:
Very interesting Barb!

Yeah, I know the hull way isn't the most realistic, but it was a quick and easy way to summarize the minor improvements and slow weight gains of ships through the war.

Good list.
 
I like the idea of mech engineers, as a brigade attachment maybe?
 
One thing I would like to point out about division size. At the begining of WWI most major powers had so called Square division. that is a division had 2 Brigades each of 2 regiments of 3 battlelions, often with 2 artillary brigades. The Germans and later most other nations converted to the modern triangle divisions, 3 regiments each with 3 battlelions. This was because triangle Divisions where consider more efficient and easier to command. Might add both the U.S and Japan entered WWII with old fashion square division but converted to triangle divions rather quickly, so there should be a penalty for overlarge divisions if somebody wants to bring back the old fashion square division
Might add if you had good officers ,they could handle a large division. For example a number of large division that where consider elite include the New Zealand 2nd division the German Gross Deutschland or the US 1infantry. But these where for the most part singalur exceptions.So the penalty for a large division should decrease with better officers rating.so perhaps a rank 4 or 5 lvl leader the size penalty would be greatly reduced or even go away
 
jjfz3000 said:
great idea...

But it's a lot of micromanagement though...

I spend 90% of my time between 1936 and 1939 doing absolutely nothing in game except research and the occasional production orders. I've got lots of time to kill, and this seems like a fun way to do it.
 
Holy Crap!!! This looks awesome!!!!!!! :) If this dose not get added to HOI3, then make it a mod!!! Also love how you design ypur own ship. I'll make a light Crusier with a 14inch gun!!! Then when bombers apaer, it will be sent to the bottom in about a minute!! :rofl:
By the way, i think there are still some battalions that should be able to be added: Armored Trains (manly for undevolped nations) and Siege Arty. :)
Also just have a question. Would i be able to say take a battleship hull and add a flight deck to it to make a super carrier??? Just wondering.....
 
Last edited:
Really nice idea in general... I forsee a lot of bugs in it though... hehehe ;)

I would definitly wanna have this in the next major release of HOI ... :)

I am all for realism... the more the better... but templates is a must... sometimes you just dont have the energy to micromanage everything... hehehe
 
Patton23 said:
Holy Crap!!! This looks awesome!!!!!!! :) If this dose not get added to HOI3, then make it a mod!!! Also love how you design ypur own ship. I'll make a light Crusier with a 14inch gun!!! Then when bombers apaer, it will be sent to the bottom in about a minute!! :rofl:
By the way, i think there are still some battalions that should be able to be added: Armored Trains (manly for undevolped nations) and Siege Arty. :)
Also just have a question. Would i be able to say take a battleship hull and add a flight deck to it to make a super carrier??? Just wondering.....

Yes, you'd be able to turn a battleship hull into a carrier (or supercarrier). This is historical precedent for that (The USS Lexington was originally supposed to be a battlecruiser and the IJN Shinano was originally going to be another Yamato-class super battleship. The Japanese even had some battleships with flight decks for launching lots of seaplanes:

ise-d.gif


Hull size just determines the number and type of components you can install on it.