• 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.
don't know if this has been posted already, but how about an event that brings soviet to the allies? as it is now, expeditionary forces can only be sent to allies and that leaves out the possibility of britain sending thousands of planes and tanks to the commitern.
 
Maybe instead of putting SU to allies, better idea will be creating series of events.

1. For UK with a question "Are we sending help to SU?"
a)yes
b)no

2. If yes then an event lets say in every month with a possibility of sending some equipment.
 
+100 relationship wouldn't change government type, nor would it change the fact that Poland is a member of the Allies, not the commintern. I think that Poland would be less hostile as a result of that assistance, even friendly against (not asking too much, Poland would probably be trashed if the Soviets didn't assist them).
Sorry about the confusion--Poland is never going to be voluntarily communist. I wouldn't rule out some trickery on the part of the Soviet Union though. Check out their "democratic government" they built in Poland after the war, and then tell me that a Poland weakened by war and occupied by the Soviet Union in't going to pressured strongly towards the Commintern. Perhaps that's a different topic entirely...
 
As I said Stalin was just as likely to help Poland out unconditionally as Poland was to make him honorary leader... I think that the closest realistic situation would be if the Soviets decide to DOW Germany after the "Danzig or War" event and afterwards "librate" Poland, the only difference between this and what happened in history is that this would happen earlier...
 
Indian Independence/Partition Events

Hello, been playing 1.3, and noticed that upon granting independence to India in vanilla HOI2, Pakistan is created *without* it's eastern component (should include provinces of dhaka, comilla, and rangpur roughly).

Perhaps CORE could script events so that three options appear for the partition of india:

1) no partition (resulting in massive recurring dissent levels of about 40% for the new india which persist throughout the game period)

2) Historical

3) Expanded pakistan, which includes some extra provinces over the historical, at the cost of a large dissent value for both India and Pakistan.

I can help with the history if someone is willing to do the scripting.

zahirkus@yahoo.com
 
Just realized this event would be more complicated then first seen...I guess chittagong would have to got pakistan as well, but in any event, this would create an india with a sector with no supply - the whole region of assam.

Zahirkus said:
Hello, been playing 1.3, and noticed that upon granting independence to India in vanilla HOI2, Pakistan is created *without* it's eastern component (should include provinces of dhaka, comilla, and rangpur roughly).

Perhaps CORE could script events so that three options appear for the partition of india:

1) no partition (resulting in massive recurring dissent levels of about 40% for the new india which persist throughout the game period)

2) Historical

3) Expanded pakistan, which includes some extra provinces over the historical, at the cost of a large dissent value for both India and Pakistan.

I can help with the history if someone is willing to do the scripting.

zahirkus@yahoo.com
 
Zahirkus said:
Just realized this event would be more complicated then first seen...I guess chittagong would have to got pakistan as well, but in any event, this would create an india with a sector with no supply - the whole region of assam.

I can save you a lot of time trying to put India into CORE2. It is already going to be in there as a British puppet. We will need events for making the jump from Crown Colony to Independent Nation. That will be a highly complex string of events.

I can help code the events, but here is what I require (in addition to the patience because of time restraints it will be awhile)...

A tree which shows how the events will flow from one event to the other.

Event text. This is the text that the player will read when the event fires.

A general idea of what you expect each event to accomplish.

Alternative paths for that ahistorical player.


That is what is needed as a minimum for a chain of events. If you do that work that will make the construction that much easier. If you only send text to read, it takes much longer because I have to do all of the above steps. It will take a place somewhere behind my Olympics event and Palestine event chains that I am constructing. MDow
 
Go on and yell at me if this already has been posted but I just thought of a couple of thingies.

1. Shouldn't carriers intercept with their CAG's when attacked by bombers?
2. Shouldn't Battleships be able to carry out port strikes. I mean if they can bomb the shit out of a beach, why not a port?
3. And BTW why does my carriers always loose all their org in like one sec when striking a port?
 
Hi there!

Modding/ pc/ coding/ programming skilzz = 0,
but I have just obtained my master’s in Military History,
and I love to play Minor nations :cool: .

So, after having found out that a CORE-project for HoI2 is in the making, I thought I might ad some suggestions online (you said you wanted it, didn’t ya?). I hope it’s useful!

I’ll divide all the data over several smaller posts, to keep things organized.
Since I’m Dutch, let’s start with this country.

INTRODUCTION:

First, Holland tried to stay neutral, and was a pretty pacifist country. Economically it was extremely dependent on international trade, especially with Germany, and so Holland was not only hit very hard by the crisis of the 30’s, it had more problems than other countries trying to recuperate.
Only in 1939 (after economic recovery and elections resulting in the socialists joining the government for the first time in Dutch political history) did a policy for rearmament really kick off. Of course, this was too little, too late.
When the German attack began, all was over within 5 days. But the small Dutch airforce did manage to score the biggest aerial victory ever in such a short time: a mere 100+ aircraft (of which only half could be considered modern, and most of those were destroyed in the first day of fighting) managed to bring down 352 aircraft :eek: , of which over 224 were destroyed, and over 250 involved Ju-52 transport aircraft, meant to be used in the upcoming British invasion.
(Note: in the invasion of Holland, the German planned to surprise the Dutch by massive use of Fallschirmjäger-divisions, who were to land in the heart of The Hague and capture the royal family, thus crippling Dutch resistance. This plan totally failed, especially because of the onslaught amongst German transport aircraft. When planning operation Seelöwe, the supposed use of paratroopers was heavily infuenced by the losses and events in may ’40 in Holland).
But on land the situation was hopeless. Nevertheless, the Dutch armed forces resisted longer and heavier than anticipated, so Hitler ordered the bombardment of Rotterdam, resulting in the capitulation af all Dutch armed forces, except those in the colonies. The Dutch East Indies capitulated early ’42, after a bitter fight against a much stronger and more modern Japanese opponent.
The Dutch armed forces-in-exile were small, but nevertheless there were some notable successes: the Dutch submarine fleet, operating in the Dutch East Indies, wreaked havoc among Japanese naval units; the Dutch merchant fleet was important; but most important for the Allied war effort were the refineries on the Dutch Antilles and the intelligence provided by the Dutch Resistance.
After the war, Indonesia declared itself independent on August 15 1945. After fighting an insurgency, the Dutch recognised Indonesia in 1947.

CHANGING TYPES/ UNITS/ NAMES:

First of all, I recommend to change the names of developed aircraft types in the tech tree.
This is my alternative suggestion:

Basic CAS: Douglas 8A/3n
Impr. CAS: Fokker T.8c
Adv. CAS:

Bas. TAC: Fokker T.V
Impr. TAC: Fokker T.IX
Adv. TAC: North American B-25 Mitchell

Bas. STR: Fokker Type 115
Impr. STR: Consolidated B-24 Liberator
Adv. STR: Avro Lincoln

Bas. TRA: Fokker F.XXXVI
Impr. TRA: Fokker F.24
Adv. TRA: Fokker Type 180

Bas. NAV: Dornier DO-24K
Impr. NAV: Fokker T.8W
Adv. NAV: Martin PBM Mariner

Bas. Esc.F: Fokker G.1A Maaier/ Faucheur/ Reaper
Impr. Esc.F: Fokker G.1B
Adv. Esc.F: Fokker G.2

Bas. Fgt: De Schelde S.21
Impr. Fgt: Supermarine Spitfire Mk.V
Adv. Fgt: North American P-51D Mustang

Bas. Int.F: Fokker D.XXI
Impr. Int.F: Fokker D.XXIII
Adv. Int.F:

MILITARY LEADERS:

Simply said, there should be more of them! And at least some of them should have a couple of skills. Unfortunately, at the moment I cannot check my sources to offer suggestions, but I do remember that CORE-HoI I was pretty satisfying.

MINISTERS/ EVENTS:

The above goes for ministers as well. Furthermore, I do have a suggestion to create an event that might lead to a facsist Dutch government (allied and/or puppeted by Germany??). Unlikely, but possible. It needs to integrated with other events, and basically should fire if Germany plays the pacifist card, France/ Allies act aggressive, and focuses around two historical(!) events:
-in 1934 a diplomatic row between Holland and Belgium erupted over the so-called “Iron Rhine”-railway, which was supposed to connect the Ruhr-area and Antwerp, running across Dutch Limburg. At first the Dutch government agreed, but later withdrew its support, after Dr. Mussert (engineer and later the leader of the fascist and collaborating NSB-party) succesfully lead a movement that unfair competition for the port of Rotterdam. The change of stance of the Dutch government ruined Dutch-Belgian pre-war relations;
-in the 30’s the Dutch government ordered the creation of several strengthened positions, including bunkers, MG-positions, artillery batteries, etc. Most of these fixed defensive fortifications (and the supportive artillery) were directed against a hypothetic German invasion. When Germany found out these plans, they protested, claiming that if Holland wanted to uphold its neutral status neutral, these modernisations should be spread out evenly against all possible invaders. The Dutch government government buckled, and reorganized its defenses; now the coast was readied against a (very unlikely) invasion from Britain, actually wasting precious heavy artillery. This in turn lead to protests from the UK, but without too much effect.
IMHO, these events can and should be integrated into events I already found in CORE-HoI 1. For example, if Germany does not occupy the Rhineland, but France/Britain do gear up for war, the Dutch position might shift to a more pro-German stance. Historically, elections were held in ’36, ’37 and ’39, which might be used to create a change-in-gov- event (against a VERY heavy dissent hit, of course). Such a government would then be lead by Mussert.
Naturally, using the same mechanism, it should be possible to let the Dutch join the Alllies as well! The Dutch queen Wilhelmina personally was totally fed up with the pre-war Dutch political system, but was even more anti-nazi (Churchill once remarked she was the only real man in the Dutch gov-in-exile). Thus, the queen would lead such a gov.

EVENTS:

There should be many more events. All events from HoI 1 should be copied (especially the “buy anti-air”-event). But there should be more. A few suggestions:
- in ’34 the CL “De 7 Provinciën”, stationed in the East Indies, was captured by mutineers, because of poor working conditions. Dutch authorities, fearing anti-colonial motives, ordered the bombardment of the vessel, resulting in a direct hit that killed dozens of sailors, although the bomb itself was meant as a warning shot and was actually supposed to miss…
This event should at least result in a decent dissent hit. If there are to be several possible results, let it depend on the damage inflicted:
1) CL sunk (CL removed from game); very high dissent hit, weak state of military exposed-> gearing up for war event started, relations with USSR down, 2+ interventionism/ 1+ hawk lobby/ +1 to right/ +1 authoritarian,
2) CL damaged ( CL org level to 0); relations with USSR down, high dissent hit, gov changed to 1+ isolationism/ 1+ to right,
3) Missed! (CL removed from game or given to USSR); very high dissent hit, gov collapses, replaced by more authoritarian, conservative, pro-german gov, relations with USSR/ Allies down, gering up for war;
-much already has been said about the German warplans ending up in Belgian hands after a German recon plane crashed in Belgium in ’39. However, the date of fall gelb had leaked out as well: the Dutch military embassy envoy in Berlin, col. Sas van Gent, had a high-ranking contact in the Abwehr, informing him of the precise invasion-date. Unfortunately, circumstances led to the last-minute postponement of fall gelb more than 20 times(!), for reasons differing from bad weather to Hitler getting cold feet. Originally, the invasion was planned to start in november ’39. This meant that the poor colonel raised the alarm every time, only to lose more and more of his dwindling credibility. When his final warning arrived in the early hours of May 10 1940, the only reaction was irritation (wonder how his superiors felt at the end of that day…).
I suggest an event in which the Dutch can ignore the message or raise the alarm. If the alarm is raised, mobilisation should occur (extra manpower, blueprints, militia, garrisons?), the info passed on to the other involved countries (BEL, LUX, FRA, UK) (giving them an extra “gear up for war event”), maybe gaining an intel-blueprint?, relations with Germany way down (even DoW?), allow military access to allies/ belgium. If the warning is ignored, the only consequence should be +1 dove lobby and +1 isolationism,
-it was a Dutch naval officer who invented the “schnorkel”, allowing U-boats to remain underwater while recharging there batteries. The design was captured and later used by the Germans. So, I suggest an event in which the Dutch get blueprints for electric subs in 1941 at the latest. If Holland is occupied by that time, these blueprints should be made available to Germany,
-I’m still thinking of other events, and in the meantime try to come up with a decent plan for the events I have suggested here.

BENELUX:

I read in this forum that someone suggested a Benelux-event of some sort. I cannot emphasize enough that this should NOT be done. First, the Benelux was only created AFTER WW2, because the gov’s of these countries realised pre-war mistakes should not be repeated; all of them were neutral, isolated and did not cooperate. They realised they had much in common, and that economic cooperation was vital for survival. This resulted in the BeNeLux.
Before the war however, there was a deep lack of trust between these countries, and there were many (historical) reasons why they did not got along, but without the war, the benelux would never have been founded (it is just as likely as the DDR being founded in 1940, right after Hitler has taken Paris –indeed, JUST NOT POSSIBLE!!!). The only way the Benelux should come into play, is AFTER these countries have been liberated by the Allies (NOT the USSR!!!) and there gov’s restored.
 
Back again!

This time, I have another issue that bothers me. It is about technologies.
Nominally, the major powers can develop 5 techs simultaneously, where the minors can develop 1 or 2.
This is all fine. I have already mentioned that I just love to play minors. One of the reasons why I enjoy to play them so much, is because if you play well, the difference with history can be very big, and because these countries can expand in science – I just finished a game playing as Argentina, ending in dec. ’45 as an ally of Ger (which has actually conquered Vladivostok!), having occupied the whole of Latin-America below Panama, with an IC-level of 95(?) And best of all, I could now develop 5 techs at a time!
Now, my objection is this. How can it be that when I start out as Argentina, and I conquer the whole of South-America, my tech level goes from 2 at a time, to 5 at a time? Especially since when I start as Germany in ’36, and having conquered POL, CZE, AUS, YUG, GRE, NOR, DEN, HOL, LUX and BEL in spring ’41, I STILL CAN ONLY DEVELOP 5 TECHS SIMULTANEOUSLY???
I understand that this invloves reasons for gameplay, but come on? If you think about it, it’s just ridiculous!! I guess General Peron found some ancient Inca-secrets that proved useful???
If it is not possible for major powers to up this number, than at least they should be presented with many more historical blueprints (this reflects factories, universities, research centers and research data captured), and/or (for example) a bonus-blueprint for every country conquered (just as a “scientific breakthrough!”-event).
But, if possible I prefer to be able to develop more techs at a time, although I can imagine that the financial penalties for every tech developed above the nominal 5, may rise exponentially. Maybe it is even possible to integrate conquered research centers (for example, Fokker in the Netherlands, Farman in France, Skoda in Cze). All of this would be historically more accurate; in fact GER shifted most of it’s production and research to the Farman facory in occupied France. Just as accurate is the fact that GER actually tried to absorb as much research as possible, finally resulting in a fragmentation and the eventual disintegration of the scientific research results in GER.

Whatever is worked out/thought of, I would be glad if CORE would look into this and hopefully make some positive changes!
 
I hope nobody is sick of me yet…
Next on my list.

SECRET WEAPON TECHS:

Especially with (turbojet-engined) aircraft, I’m annoyed by the types suggested for many countries. This is not historical (yes, I know, the game is not meant to reflect history, but we can try to get as close as possible, can’t we?).
For example, most of the types suggested for the USA and USSR are types of aircraft that could only have been developed because of the captured German research data, and it is therefore very likely that most types would have looked/ been very different. Two examples: the MiG-15 could only be developed after the British sold 2 Rolls Royce “Nene”-turbojets to the USSR after WW2 (why, why, why???). So, without this British lapse in judgement, the USSR would have taken a lot longer to develop this aircraft, if at all. Another example: only after WW2, having captured tons of German scientists, data and machinery and having obtained vital British research data, were the USA in a position to start their historic path to domination of the skies. If either of those would not have been obtained it is very feasible that the USA would not have taken the No. 1 spot in this regard.
I’m still doing the research for alternatives, and hope to put forward a comprehensive list for minor and major powers in one time.
 
keep in mind that all major nations (well, except Japan, which only copied german planes) developed their own jet fighters, the UK for example developed the Meteor on its own, and its not unlikely that they shared their research with the US if the german scientists would not have been available, resulting in only minor changes...
 
King Konquer said:
Back again!

This time, I have another issue that bothers me. It is about technologies.
Nominally, the major powers can develop 5 techs simultaneously, where the minors can develop 1 or 2...

...Whatever is worked out/thought of, I would be glad if CORE would look into this and hopefully make some positive changes!

The number of tech teams is determined by the amount of IC that you control. The more industry that you have, the more research teams that you can support.

IRC, the number of IC per research team can be adjusted in the misc.txt file. The maximum number of teams is determined by Paradox so without a coding change by them, no increase over five is possible. MDow
 
King Konquer said:
I hope nobody is sick of me yet…
Next on my list.

SECRET WEAPON TECHS:

...I’m still doing the research for alternatives, and hope to put forward a comprehensive list for minor and major powers in one time.

You might want to wait until you see the list of aircraft models that is included with CORE2. We have completely redone the tech trees for aircraft and the models as well. Baylox has been working on the new models for the aircraft. If you are still interested, drop him a PM, or I am sure that he will read this thread and give you more information. MDow
 
King Konquer said:
Hi there!

Modding/ pc/ coding/ programming skilzz = 0,
but I have just obtained my master’s in Military History,
and I love to play Minor nations :cool: .

MAs in History are a good thing...
Now if I could find a way to make mine useful for something other than volunteer game modding :D


So, after having found out that a CORE-project for HoI2 is in the making, I thought I might ad some suggestions online (you said you wanted it, didn’t ya?). I hope it’s useful!

Always looking for more.


I’ll divide all the data over several smaller posts, to keep things organized.
Since I’m Dutch, let’s start with this country...
...First of all, I recommend to change the names of developed aircraft types in the tech tree.

See my above post about aircraft models.


MILITARY LEADERS:

Simply said, there should be more of them! And at least some of them should have a couple of skills. Unfortunately, at the moment I cannot check my sources to offer suggestions, but I do remember that CORE-HoI I was pretty satisfying.

MINISTERS/ EVENTS:

The above goes for ministers as well.

I don't think that any changes have been made to the Vanilla HoI2 files for the initial release.


...There should be many more events. All events from HoI 1 should be copied (especially the “buy anti-air”-event). But there should be more. A few suggestions:
- in ’34 the CL “De 7 Provinciën”, stationed in the East Indies, was captured by mutineers, because of poor working conditions...

Too early for the timeframe of the game. Because the timeframe of the game is 1936, we must assume that the De Zeven Provencien survived her mutiny.


-much already has been said about the German warplans ending up in Belgian hands after a German recon plane crashed in Belgium in ’39. However, the date of fall gelb had leaked out as well: the Dutch military embassy envoy in Berlin, col. Sas van Gent, had a high-ranking contact in the Abwehr, informing him of the precise invasion-date. Unfortunately, circumstances led to the last-minute postponement of fall gelb more than 20 times(!), for reasons differing from bad weather to Hitler getting cold feet. Originally, the invasion was planned to start in november ’39. This meant that the poor colonel raised the alarm every time, only to lose more and more of his dwindling credibility. When his final warning arrived in the early hours of May 10 1940, the only reaction was irritation (wonder how his superiors felt at the end of that day…).
I suggest an event in which the Dutch can ignore the message or raise the alarm. If the alarm is raised, mobilisation should occur (extra manpower, blueprints, militia, garrisons?), the info passed on to the other involved countries (BEL, LUX, FRA, UK) (giving them an extra “gear up for war event”), maybe gaining an intel-blueprint?, relations with Germany way down (even DoW?), allow military access to allies/ belgium. If the warning is ignored, the only consequence should be +1 dove lobby and +1 isolationism,

I don't know enough about this to say one way or the other. Head over to the offsite forum or wait here for a response.


-it was a Dutch naval officer who invented the “schnorkel”, allowing U-boats to remain underwater while recharging there batteries. The design was captured and later used by the Germans. So, I suggest an event in which the Dutch get blueprints for electric subs in 1941 at the latest. If Holland is occupied by that time, these blueprints should be made available to Germany,

No Electric Boat in CORE2.


-I’m still thinking of other events, and in the meantime try to come up with a decent plan for the events I have suggested here.

Keep 'em coming.
 
I don't know if this has been suggested before... i don't even know if it could work!! but:

Could be possible for tech teams to gain experience??

With events perhaps???
 
Kretoxian said:
I don't know if this has been suggested before... i don't even know if it could work!! but:

Could be possible for tech teams to gain experience??

With events perhaps???

We've gone over this before, and determined that except for some special exceptions, this isn't worth the effort honestly. In order to do this, we;d have to have multiple entries in the techteam files for each team, with varying degrees of skill (and even specialties), with varying strat and death dates, and have a slew of events for each one to activate and deactivate them. Then we;d have to do this for every nation, and potential nation in game. For the net game play effect, it's just not worth it.
 
JRaup said:
We've gone over this before, and determined that except for some special exceptions, this isn't worth the effort honestly. In order to do this, we;d have to have multiple entries in the techteam files for each team, with varying degrees of skill (and even specialties), with varying strat and death dates, and have a slew of events for each one to activate and deactivate them. Then we;d have to do this for every nation, and potential nation in game. For the net game play effect, it's just not worth it.


especially since even unused tech teams would gain experience, since there is no way to determine which techteam the player used...
 
To Robertcop:

To start at the bottom:
3) I have no idea; maybe for gameplay reasons, or it might reflect the enormous amounts of resources necessary for a succesful port strike?
2) Yeah, a BB can indeed hit a port. There is however a huge difference between randomly blast away on a strip of sand and dunes, and a precision bombardment on a port, that probably is reinforced and as well protected as possible (bunkers, reinforced concrete installations, sandbags, lots of repairteams and –equipment). Even worse, most major ports had their own long-range artillery batteries just for such an attack, and land-based artillery has always been more accurate; look at the WW1 Gallipoli-campaign to see the devastating difference…
So, basically a BB has very little chance of being succesful at this, while there is a decent chance it is hit itself. There are many more (tactical!) reasons why this hasn’t been done since the 17th century, but basically it comes down to the advantage land-based long-range ART has over sea-based ART. To name them all is not impossible, but I do suggest that we will not use the forum for these lengthy discussions. However, I can summarize that most of these reasons fall away against the scale of the map, so not making is possible to use BB’s for this is the best way to deal with it.


I do give you an example, just to let you know what problems come into view when using a BB for port strikes: first, most ports are built in places that are easily defendable, and often they are built on rock and/or they have been reinforced with steel and concrete. Second, basically the big guns on a BB have a range of around 40 km. However, for aiming purposes they also use the fountains created by their own shells to be able to correct elevation and range, and so be able to create a hit. When striking land, this is not possible anymore (only explosions without reference), and can only be compensated by approaching the target (port) until it is in visual range. When that happens, in all likelyhood the BB is already sunk: land-based fixed ART has had years and years of (gunnery) training, and they have made grids of the entire port-area. It is the equivalent of nowadays GPS, it only works the other way around. Third, there has never been a BB with more than 14 big guns, and most have between 8 and 10, and they can only fire altogether from the broadside. You can fairly estimate that a BB would be seriously outgunned, literally speaking! Fourth, let’s assume a BB wants to cut these objections, and get within 20 km. before opening fire (in most of my sources, this seems to be the minimum range for success), using intel from aerial photos and spies, and first targets the land-based ART and even succeeds in shutting it down. Now it finds itself within range of all types of vessels, like corvets and (ultra-fast) MTB’s, for which a BB has absolutely NO defence. Even worse, it has most likely already sailed into a minefield, maybe even other obstacles, and most major ports cannot easily be approached by big vessels like BB’s, because of the depth of the waterways toward the harbor (Example: the port of Rotterdam can only be approached by bluewater vessels in a straight line, starting from some 35 km out on the sea). Coming closer still, even divers/ commandos/ marines/ miniature vessels/ torpedoes become something to worry about.
Please also look at history: since the conception of the bomber, all military establishments (even those sceptical of the use of aircraft) have preferred aircraft over ships when striking ports, for many different reasons (shotdown aircraft are less costly and easier to replace, aircraft quickly became more able to put a direct hit on an installation).
Basically, all these reasons can be incorporated into a very interesting game, but that would have more of a RTS than a strategy-game. And even when put in a strategy-game, the scale used on the map is too big to make it work right in this game,


3) No, carrier-based CAG’s should not intercept when attacked by bombers. There are several reasons why not, I’ll put a few down:
- a CAG consists of fighters, dive bombers and (torpedo-) bombers, of which only the fighters are available for aerial defense. Now, a CAG has a TOTAL of some 30 (most pre-war carriers of most nations) aircraft to up to 100 (the very large US carriers that appeared from ’43 onward, as well as the planned-but-never-built Japanese carriers) aircraft, of which usually a third are fighters.
That means that PER CARRIER THERE ARE NO MORE THAN 35 FIGHTERS. In other words; the AD capability of an in-port carrier is negligible this purpose (remember that every bomber you build, represents some 100-250 aircraft; it is the equivalent of a WING, not a squadron),
-also the state of readiness amongst ships that are in-port, usually is (very) low, even when put on alert, because of crew on leave, ship being refitted and resupplied, etc.,
-for an aircraft to take off from a CV, the CV needs to sail against the wind, to create maximum lift for take off. Even in our advanced times, this is still CRUCIAL for carriers to be able to launch and receive aircraft!!! So, this is a BIG problem when in port,
-have you ever visited a port? I have, and I dare to say there are very few ports where an aircraft can take off or land without crashing into an obstacle of some sort (masts and antennae!!!)

To the admin:
I’m sorry for this lengthy post. Feel free to scrap it, or adjust it, or put it in shorter but better words and sentences :D
 
To all:
Wow!! I expected a response, and I expected it to be quick… You guys (galz???) seem to be at least as addicted to gaming as I am!! Respect to you all, guys!



To MateDow:

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean!! Seems an MA in History is just meant for gaming issues…

And I’ll keep working on my revised list of aircraft types, just to keep up with you guys. That way I’ll be able to respond to your new tech tree as soon as it appears! Better not to keep you wargaming-junkies waiting for too long…
By the way, I am very curious as to what you guys are changing in the tech trees. Personally, I prefer the tech tree from HoI2 over that of HoI 1, mostly because you have a much better oversight (In HoI 1, I hated all those irreleveant small techs that need to be developed in ’37 or ’38, but prevent you from developing those big-gunned SP ART’s or ADV (H) ARM’s in ‘44/’45. I know it’s done right, but it’s extremely annoying to waste 100+ hrs. of gaming, just because I developed the wrong sized AT/ ART gun in 38…)

Schnorkel:
Even if you take away the electric boat, Dönitz himself once admitted that it was the most important innovation for the U-boats during the war. So, I suppose it is justifiable to give the Germans a SS-blueprint in case of annexing Holland.

Mutiny on “De Zeven Provinciën”:
I know the date is early, but I would like to see the event dated somewhere early 36: it can set in motion a series of events that will lead to a series of events, eventually reaffirming Dutch (historical) neutrality, reduce it to a German “province”, or waking the warlions and letting them join the Allies.
All of the three were very much a possibility! I can make my point with some statistics:
-no occupied country has delivered so many SS-men (voluntarily!!!) to the Germans as Holland; 2 divisions (and some more), totalling over 22.000 men,
-of all 110.000 Jews living here before the war, over 90.000 were deported, with the active help of all branches of Dutch government (not because they were nazi’s, but because they were good, loyal clerks…),
-Resistance to German occupation started here before anywhere else, and it became heavier and more active than in most other occupied countries,
-
Why do I want to integrate this event so bad? Well, because it is a very good starting point for a series of events, reflecting Dutch (political) society and (in)stability of the 20’s/30’s.

Number of tech teams:
I understand that the number corresponds with your IC-level, that’s fair, right and (historically) correct. And I understand that it’s capped at 5, at least for gaming issues (although I do believe there is a max. level of scientific research a country can do; there are only so many scholars, right?). But I do believe that much, much more must be done with blueprints. The way it is now, is just incorrect: except for CZE, there is nowhere Germany takes profit from it’s conquests, and that is just historically incorrect!! The Germans took huge amounts of data from the occupied countries and used it to good advantage. So, if the number of tech teams cannot be upped, do make more and better use of blueprints!!!
MORE BLUEPRINTS!! MORE BLUEPRINTS!! MORE BLUEPRINTS!! MORE BLUEPRINTS!!


To Archangel85:

Actually, Japan was very succesful in developing it’s own jet-fighters, but their designs were less technologically advanced and innovating, especially compared to those of Germany and Britain. In contrast to what many people believe, they didn’t receive much help from Germany at all. And in the few cases an agreement was made, it never materialised (example: Japan bought a complete Me-163 rocket-fighter, including blueprints and a functioning engine, to be shipped to Japan by submarine. However, the sub was sunk en route, en subsequently, the Japanese pushed forward their own design, however they did study the exterior of their German counterpart and tried at least to gain more advice), leaving the Japanese on their own.
I do agree that the British and the USA cooperated completely in this regard, and you are probably right that any changes are not relevant. However, I do think that many aircraft would not have existed or would have been very different, if only because many designs were put on halt, to incorporate lessons learned from recovered German research data (example: the flying wings built by Northrop, although not taken into serial production, had a huge boost by the captured German research data). In other cases aircraft types were very swiftly replaced by types in which this new research was integrated (example: the F-80 Shooting Star that was swiftly replaced by the F-86 Sabre).

But on the whole, I guess you are right: it is not worth the fuss…