Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

List of Wishes for 1.09

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.
A resolution to grossly exaggerated effect the capital's infrastructure has on the ESE of the entire army would be nice. Maybe just by increasing the fallout value in the event of the capital being bombed so the ESE would not fall below 50% would be good if the effect cannot be removed altogether.
 
jkduncan1973 said:
...also a couple other peeves, Subs should have torpedoes and mines...
Click to expand...
I generally second that, although 1) subs already have mines as (their only possible) attachment and 2) I'd much prefer them to be given the possibility to have radar and radar-warning devices (respectively increasing spotting and decreasing visibility).
 
Titan79 said:
I generally second that, although 1) subs already have mines as (their only possible) attachment and 2) I'd much prefer them to be given the possibility to have radar and radar-warning devices (respectively increasing spotting and decreasing visibility).
Click to expand...
I thought their only possible attachments were naval spotters.
 
Mr_B0narpte said:
I thought their only possible attachments were naval spotters.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I forgot about them - that applies to heavy subs (which I never build, btw). I don't know about them, but surely normal subs can have mines. Or was it just the TRM? :unsure:

Anyway, in 1.09 it would be nice to have this changed and to add a bit more flexibility and, sorry for the pun, depth to submarines.
 
Titan79 said:
Yeah, I forgot about them - that applies to heavy subs (which I never build, btw). I don't know about them, but surely normal subs can have mines. Or was it just the TRM? :unsure:
Click to expand...
It's just for TRM. It would be nice to have more potential attachments for submarines as spotters are pointless IMO due to the increased visibility.
1.08 AoD:
Code: 
naval_unit_type = 1
allowed_brigades = naval_spotter_s
1.07 TRM:
Code: 
naval_unit_type = 1
# allowed_brigades = naval_spotter_s
allowed_brigades = naval_mines
 
An event for Portugal that makes it support N.spain in the cwil war.(scw)

A button or option for selecting off or on to cost of skill points when you promote leaders.
 
Last edited:
NiL_FisK|Urd said:
Modable Leader promotion experience loss in the misc.txt
Modable Leader skill bonus in the misc.txt
Modable Leader traits (like the "minister_modifiers.txt" file)
Click to expand...


agreed. "Carrier Leader" for CV guys in UK, USA and JAP is needed. "Battleship leader" as well as "cavalry leader".

+ addition to commando: Para, Mountaineer and Marine leader
 
Sounds nice best but it has to be delivered with the AI properly utilizing them. That was one of the fixing in 1.8 for the currently existing traits and I'm wondering how does it work now to those that had some mileage with 1.8 - good?
 
Hister said:
Sounds nice best but it has to be delivered with the AI properly utilizing them. That was one of the fixing in 1.8 for the currently existing traits and I'm wondering how does it work now to those that had some mileage with 1.8 - good?
Click to expand...

well - depends. in general its an improvement as commando units are lead by commando leaders (all alpini units use alpini leaders from what i saw). the little annoyance occurs when a country used all non-commando units for its inf and has still more inf on the field - it wont use commando leaders for those.

for example turkey has 20 inf divs and 20 leaders, 2 of them are commandos, 18 non commandos. so turkey will use the 18 non-commando leaders for 18 inf divs and two end up without a leader, instead the 2 commando leaders stay in the leader pool as long as there is no commando unit produced.
i potted this little thing for turkey, the rest has no trouble with that new tweak. its just that turkey hasnt enough leaders in general - for the rest of the world its better, esp for ITA.

so what i know ai uses traits like this:

LW - GAR
commando - commando only
panzer leader - ARM, MEC
offensive - ARM, MEC, MOT

i just made a quick game some weeks ago, and iirc its still using tank busters for INTs sometimes, but not sure
 
Make it possible to trade/give away more none national provinces to allies but to a higher cost.

Bergen in Norway should have 1 in manpower not zero.
http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergen#Demografi


U73(England) should build a small air-force and a defensive fleet not just regular infantry.
 
Last edited:
Hister said:
Thank you for the info. Looks like there is still room for improvements there!
Click to expand...

yes, but if you compare 1.07 with 1.08 there was already progress. both for immersion and gameplay as these leader things can influence the game at least a bit (if like in ITA's case commando leaders dont lead INF anymore (10% penalty) but lead MTN (5% bonus)). these little percentages should mount up to quite a lot in the end, i'd say.
 
Didn't CORE paid special attention to that? Might be a time saver to simply copy their values with their permission of course and credit.
 
There should be an event command to increase manpower in a province - with this one could add manpower to indonesia once indonesia is liberated (and prevent the netherlands from gaining tons of indonesian soldiers)
 
NiL_FisK|Urd said:
There should be an event command to increase manpower in a province - with this one could add manpower to indonesia once indonesia is liberated (and prevent the netherlands from gaining tons of indonesian soldiers)
Click to expand...
I would like that event command to be included for modders. But Indonesia (and the whole world) should have the appropiate manpower from the start. The Netherlands should not have cores on Indonesia in the first place, maybe it could be given some more starting manpower for more balance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back