Upgrading Inf comment.

[petester]

There seems to be quite a few comments about being unable to upgrade your Inf - solution, of course, is that the AT and Art research is needed prior to upgrading.

Not a problem, & I think that this is an awesome upgrade to the game - after all, they were required in real life.

However, game wise, I think that this is causing problems for the AI. As the game progresses, I find the AI is falling further and further behind in their Inf research. Not the big nations as much, but certainly the smaller ones.

I was thinking about a solution for this & other than re-writing the AI research orders, perhaps an event could fire when a minor nation country researches the next level of Inf, that would give them blueprints for the next level of AT & ART - thus cutting back on some of the research time needed to keep up to their bigger neighbours...

Anyway, comments?

 

[unmerged(39735)]

However, game wise, I think that this is causing problems for the AI. As the game progresses, I find the AI is falling further and further behind in their Inf research. Not the big nations as much, but certainly the smaller ones.

IMO small countries in general SHOULD be significantly behind the majors in INF research so personally, I don't see a problem with them being say 2 full levels behind the majors. They're not going to pose any sort of serious threat to a major regardless.

One thing that probably could be changed to make the smaller AI countries prioritize better would be to severely restrict which armor techs the minor AI countries are allowed to research and then give armor a very high priority for all minors. In general I've noticed that most minors give very high priority to Infantry and Industry techs but very low priority to Armor techs.

 

[unmerged(49819)]

Check out this Finnish site.

http://www.jaegerplatoon.net/MAIN.html

Other then small arms, Finland really could not domestically produce anything. They produced some ammunition for heavy weapons, but their domestic aircraft were an embaressment, and they just couldn't make artillery [no heavy industry].

---

One of the biggest problems for minor power are the capital intensive military goods like artillery and other heavy weapons. They go obsolete fast, but the difference between a military that has them, and one that doesn't is huge.

Look at modern militaries- the F22 can rock the socks off 5-10 times its numbers of older aircraft like the F-16.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairfo/articles/20060807.aspx

And even countries that are modernizing rapidly and succesfully like India have had huge problems trying to make things like jet engines

---

For world war two, look at the military hardware that started v. ended the war.

In 1939, most nations with tanks had a majority of machine gun armed tanks, that a tungstan RIFLE bullet could penetrate; and the cutting edge tank had a 37mm gun, and armor that the normal ATG could make swiss cheese of.

By 1945, the cutting edge tank had a high velocity 75mm gun, and infared sights.

Most nations started WWII with 75/76mm artillery batteries, with 1 in 3 or 4 being 105/122. By the end 105/150s were the normal mix.

Aircraft went from having biplanes being a front line aircraft for every power [even if just in the CAS, recon and torpedo bomber roles] to jets.

---

With out a huge industrial base to replace losses WHILE upgrading, most nations could not compete... heck, historically that was a large reason why Italy and Japan could not play with the big boys was that their industrial bases could barely sustain a build up, much less real war production and R&D.

Even Germany lost out in the economy game against the allies.

===

A minor should struggle to mantain a front line, first class military.

Minor's don't play with the big boys via matching them strenght on strenght; the ones who are good militarily do so via doctrines (training and character of the people; see winter war)

 

[petester]

I agree completely with what you both have said.

That aside, I find the game is now more inbalanced... Now this may be more historical... but I personally would prefer an AI with a challange...

Some examples... in my game, Australia, Dutch, South Africa have 1918 inf in fall of 1941. While this may or may not be historically accurate, it is making swift work of any invasion forces they try to land...

 

[petester]

Here is another one. in mid 1942, Sweden has medium tanks, but 1918 Inf - why? Because they have yet to research Art... Yet, they are way up on the tech tree for other items...

My point is, if AT/Art are now priorities for upgrading Inf, this needs to be added to the research priorities for these countries - or have them get some sort of quick fix, like a blueprint event...

 

[petester]

Sorry to harp over this issue, but was wondering if anyone else is noticing this inf upgrade issue?

As a potential quick fix, I was thinking that perhaps an event could be easily written to have AT/Art blueprints given to all countries, at a set point in time? ie, on their historical year, or their historical year +6 mths?

I think that if the counries had blueprints, they would be more tempted to research the tech... After all, my allies focus their research often towards techs they have blueprints for...

I am not an event writer type, so perhaps someone could assist?

 

[RealAtaman]

Sorry to harp over this issue, but was wondering if anyone else is noticing this inf upgrade issue?

As a potential quick fix, I was thinking that perhaps an event could be easily written to have AT/Art blueprints given to all countries, at a set point in time? ie, on their historical year, or their historical year +6 mths?

I think that if the counries had blueprints, they would be more tempted to research the tech... After all, my allies focus their research often towards techs they have blueprints for...

I am not an event writer type, so perhaps someone could assist?

Well, I like that idea very much - could anybody do that ?