Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Models.csv & names.csv

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.
EDIT: You spoke of vowels, so i replied about vowels of course, consonants can be soft or hard. I just made there a misprint.

And if you insist on the fact that soft and hard vowels do exist in Russian, i must be speaking now some different Russian;) they don't have softness at all! Actually i don't get how a vowel can be soft.... a consonant immediately before it can be soft but that doesn't say that a vowel is soft.

So how would explain the existence of -ûé | -èé?:)

If you think otherwise, please enlighten me as to the main principles of phonetic classification of Russian vowels, okay? I will give what i learnt at the university, deal?;)
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by MRAKoris
EDIT: You spoke of vowels, so i replied about vowels of course, consonants can be soft or hard. I just made there a misprint.

And if you insist on the fact that soft and hard vowels do exist in Russian, i must be speaking now some different Russian;) they don't have softness at all! Actually i don't get how a vowel can be soft.... a consonant immediately before it can be soft but that doesn't say that a vowel is soft.

So how would explain the existence of -ûé | -èé?
Click to expand...
There is a difference between soft and hard vowels. In some languages it's called soft and hard vowels while in others the difference remains unnamed. I guess in Russian it's the latter situation. That's why I used hyphens to underline that this term is unofficial and used solely for this discussion purposes.

Nevertheless, I mean the phonetical difference between a:я ([a]:[ya]), э:е ([e]:[ye]), у:ю (:[yu]) and о:ё ([o]:[yo]).

is not correct. If you write strjelkowaja - first "jaj" is so purely German and looks not neat like Smirnoff and then -strje will correspond to Russian:
Click to expand...
In language studies the square brackets are usually used for phonetical scrypt. Since there is no phonetical scrypt encoding in most browsers, I used simplified version of what I was thaught at my University. I was not suggesting the version 'strjelkowaja', but [strjelko:waja] . The earlier is apparently german transcryption, whith which I have been fighting here on this forum for quite some time.

Anyway, AFAIK the word is стрелковая, and not стрэлковая. If so, then the phonetical value of е should be preserved. Get the point now?
Cheers

EDIT/ We can continue this discussion about simplified IPA on some different forum or by mail, if you please. :)
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by Halibutt
There is a difference between soft and hard vowels. In some languages it's called soft and hard vowels while in others the difference remains unnamed. I guess in Russian it's the latter situation. That's why I used hyphens to underline that this term is unofficial and used solely for this discussion purposes.

Nevertheless, I mean the phonetical difference between a:я ([a]:[ya]), э:е ([e]:[ye]), у:ю (:[yu]) and о:ё ([o]:[yo]).

In language studies the square brackets are usually used for phonetical scrypt. Since there is no phonetical scrypt encoding in most browsers, I used simplified version of what I was thaught at my University. I was not suggesting the version 'strjelkowaja', but [strjelko:waja] . The earlier is apparently german transcryption, whith which I have been fighting here on this forum for quite some time.

Anyway, AFAIK the word is стрелковая, and not стрэлковая. If so, then the phonetical value of е should be preserved. Get the point now?
Cheers

EDIT/ We can continue this discussion about simplified IPA on some different forum or by mail, if you please. :)
Click to expand...



One remark: when you write it this way: [strjelko:waja] i take it as if you soften the sound "r" - ðü and when you put o: as a sort of diphthongoid that makes no sense too, if you want to show the stress which falls onto "o" then Russian phonetic transcription has an arrow sign - well which can be replaced by English apostrophe sign. Why am i so meticulous that's because - ":" is showing the length of a sound or else that this is a diphthongoid - but the first statement of vowel phonetic and phonological characteristics says that in Russian all vowels are equally long.

And again the softness and hardness is pretty different thing - like in case -ûé -èé that's the consonant which is soft or hard and that's a sort of regressive influence on the vowels which follow those consonants.

BTW, how long have you studied Russian, very curious:)
 
Ah, i see, then i beg your pardon, just didn't know such a name of a ship.
 
The discussion of how Russian is pronounced is I am sure very interesting for those Russian speakers among us, but it is cluttering up this thread, and quite unintelligble for people like myself who speak Russian about as well as I can hover in the air. Not at all.

I don't mean to be rude, but this is ridiculous.

Steele
 
MRAKoris said:
One remark: when you write it this way: [strjelko:waja] i take it as if you soften the sound "r" - ðü and when you put o: as a sort of diphthongoid that makes no sense too, if you want to show the stress which falls onto "o" then Russian phonetic transcription has an arrow sign - well which can be replaced by English apostrophe sign. Why am i so meticulous that's because - ":" is showing the length of a sound or else that this is a diphthongoid - but the first statement of vowel phonetic and phonological characteristics says that in Russian all vowels are equally long.

And again the softness and hardness is pretty different thing - like in case -ûé -èé that's the consonant which is soft or hard and that's a sort of regressive influence on the vowels which follow those consonants.

BTW, how long have you studied Russian, very curious:)
Click to expand...
  • In both polish, portugese and spanish language studies the : sign signifies the accent on a preceeding syllabile, while an apostrophe stands for either softening or secondary accent (in phonetic and phonological script, respectively)
  • [je] is the closest I could get to [ʝɜ] without using the unicode or IPA script
  • Again, I know that softness of the consonant is something completely different from the russian [ye] and [ie] diphtong. It was used only as a reference, not to write something like "russian ye should be read like ye since ye version seems a bit strange and ye should be used instead"
  • I've been learning Russian for quite some time now (ten years or so), although it wasn't until I started to go east every now and then, when I really started to understand anything.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Halibutt and MRAKoris: Please. Stop. This.

Take it somewhere else, do it via PM or email, something, just don't clutter up this thread here. It does not pertain to TGW at all, and only the two of you can realyl understand.

Steele
 
Allenby said:
Nicely done, Dimitar! :)

We still have models to be done of all tanks and airplanes....any takers? ...Steele..? Dibo? Anyone?

It would probably help if the person doing this had the big WWI Databook as well...
Click to expand...

I'll do the tanks, after finishing the subs :)
 
Which leads me to a question - where are the latest techs on the Subs? Could someone send these or point me to the relevant page of the Tech thread, pls :)
Thanks in advance :cool:
 
Last edited:
Submarines

Submarines

Using the following classification:
22_0 Early submarine
22_1 Short-range coastal submarine
22_2 Long-range Coastal Submarine
22_3 Open Seas Submarine

MODEL_U11_22_0 'U1 - U4'
MODEL_U11_22_1 'U5 - U47'
MODEL_U11_22_3 'U48 - U50' (*)
MODEL_BRA_22_1 'F'
MODEL_CHL_22_2 'Guacolda'
MODEL_DEN_22_0 'Dykkeren'
MODEL_DEN_22_1 'Havmanden - Aegir'
MODEL_DEN_22_2 'Rota'
MODEL_FRA_22_0 'Syrene - Circe'
MODEL_FRA_22_1 'Emeraude - Brummaire'
MODEL_FRA_22_2 'Archimede - Daphne'
MODEL_FRA_22_3 'Gustav Zede - Lagrange'
MODEL_GER_22_0 'U1 - U22'
MODEL_GER_22_1 'UB1 - UB17'
MODEL_GER_22_2 'UB18 - UB169'
MODEL_GER_22_3 'U 23 - U 151'
MODEL_GRE_22_1 'Delfin'
MODEL_ITA_22_0 'Delfino - Glauco'
MODEL_ITA_22_1 'Medusa - Pullino'
MODEL_ITA_22_2 'Argonaut - F'
MODEL_ITA_22_3 'Baliglia - Micca'
MODEL_JAP_22_0 'Kaigun Holland'
MODEL_JAP_22_1 'C'
MODEL_JAP_22_2 'No 14'
MODEL_JAP_22_3 'K1'
MODEL_HOL_22_0 'O1'
MODEL_HOL_22_1 'O2 - O7'
MODEL_HOL_22_2 'KI - KV'
MODEL_NOR_22_1 'A1 - A9'
MODEL_PRU_22_1 'Ferre'
MODEL_POR_22_0 'Plongeur'
MODEL_POR_22_1 'Espadarte'
MODEL_POR_22_2 'Foca'
MODEL_RUS_22_0 'Delfin - Kaiman'
MODEL_RUS_22_1 'Akula - Minoga'
MODEL_RUS_22_2 'Narval - Bars'
MODEL_SPA_22_0 'Isaac Peral'
MODEL_SPA_22_1 'A1 - A3'
MODEL_SPA_22_2 'A4 - A9'
MODEL_SWE_22_0 'Hajen'
MODEL_SWE_22_1 'Hvalen - Abopren'
MODEL_SWE_22_2 'Hajen II - Uttern'
MODEL_ENG_22_0 'A - B'
MODEL_ENG_22_1 'C - D'
MODEL_ENG_22_2 'E - R'
MODEL_ENG_22_3 'Nautilus - L'
MODEL_USA_22_0 'A - B'
MODEL_USA_22_1 'C - N'
MODEL_USA_22_2 'O - R'
MODEL_USA_22_3 'T'

I really need help with this one. Any additions, correction, ideas, etc.
welcomed :)

P.S. Moving to tanks. This one should be easier. Could someone send me the latest techs? In the meantime I will use the ones found in the tech thread.
 
Last edited:
I have just downloaded 1.00b. There is no models.csv in it. The armor tech is there, but without the descriptions. I'm assuming the following basic classification from it:
0 - Female tank
1 - Male tank
2 - Light tank
3 - Cruiser tank
4 - Land battleship
5 - Modern tank 40mm
6 - Modern tank 70mm
7 - Modern tank 100mm

Is this correct?
 
IIIRC Dibo, yes those are the models. Although, you could theoretically use the same model for the three 'Modern Tank' models.
 
Shadow Knight said:
IIIRC Dibo, yes those are the models. Although, you could theoretically use the same model for the three 'Modern Tank' models.
Click to expand...

OK Thanks :)
I need however little help with identifying
3 - Cruiser tank
4 - Land battleship

What is cruiser tank - the post-WW1 designs??
What is land battleship - something like the British A1E1 "Independent" and the Russian T-35?
 
A cruiser tank is a lot like the late war tanks or early post-war tanks. The land battleship was never really ever built, although tanks were at times called LB's. It was planned to be a huge hulking steel mass with lots of guns on it.
 
Would these be suitable names for German tank units?

Code: 
GER;4;1. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;2. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;3. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;4. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;5. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;6. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;7. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;8. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;9. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;10. Panzerbrigade
 
Allenby said:
Would these be suitable names for German tank units?

Code: 
GER;4;1. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;2. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;3. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;4. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;5. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;6. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;7. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;8. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;9. Panzerbrigade
GER;4;10. Panzerbrigade
Click to expand...


I am not sure but Panzerbrigade is rather a big armed formation: bigger than it could be in WWI. I would prefer to stick to:

Panzerzug - platoon
Panzerkompanie - company
Panzerbataillon


Bataillon if i am right was the biggest panzerunit for WWI.
 
I'm having some problems with my home PC. So the promised models.csv will be made during the weekend. It will include the navy and the tanks. I'll post the tanks for comments here. Any help will be much appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back