You have a militarist regime that boasts it's mighty warships. One of them sinks in combat. People think you might suck as a ruler. Makes sense to me.There is no prestige in HoI, so I don't see how it can be modelled. Dissent is not the right variable.
In HoI2 ships from different nations share an abstract level (not class) and they have the same values based on that abstraction. A player knows they're equivalent, but not equal.dagas said:I don't understand. In HoI2 two ships from different nations are identical as long as they have the same class.
My fear with HoI3, with the ability to customize the ships, is that players and the AI will always build the biggest-and-best possible every time, so in practise that ability will result in every ship having the same guns, same engine, same hull, etc etc etc.
Perhaps, but we don't know how it will be.In HoI3 they have the potential to be different because it's unlikely that we will be able to research every category fully so perhaps Germany will focus in defense and speed while UK focus on guns and range or whatever they decide which means that the ships will be different.
Plus, in a system such as yours, and assuming the HoI2 rules on range continue to apply (Johan didn't say anything about changes there), no other characteristic but "range" would matter, so everyone would take it, unless gimping themselves on purpose, again creating an everyone-equal Navy.
I'll grant you the added choices for smaller economies, but if the AI builds according to history against game-mechanics we'd just have an AI programmed to shot it's own foot in all things Naval.Alexander Seil said:However, the AI will certainly build according to historical specifications, plus I doubt that, given the variety of enemies, economies, technology and geography, there would still be a single clearly "optimal" design.