Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Historical Improvement Project

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.
Show only dev responses
Der Bismarck said:
Is their any provisions for capturing tech teams?
Click to expand...
No.
Der Bismarck said:
Perhaps events could be written connected to posession of certain provinces. This could account for situations like the USA acquisuition of Werner Von Braun.
Click to expand...
This only makes sense for special cases, the team has to be worth an event and the recieving country must have real use for the team. It makes no sense, if they already have better or equal teams.

Thanks for the links, they are looking great.
hellfish6 said:
Thanks for the info - I am still running 0.51, but will load new version now. :)
Click to expand...
It did sound like that.
 
Small Luftwaffe change

Hey guys, this small change for the luftwaffe in the 1936 scenario. (St.G. 51) of Luftflotte II needs to be reclassifed as (KG 51 'Edelweiss').
This small change to the RAF Bomber command in the 1936 scenario. It should look like this:
airunit = { id = { type = 12700 id = 65 } name = "RAF Strategic Bomber Command" location = 17 base = 17
division = { id = { type = 12700 id = 70 } name = "No.1 Group 'Swift to attack'" type = strategic_bomber }
division = { id = { type = 12700 id = 66 } name = "No.2 Group 'Vincemus'" type = strategic_bomber }
division = { id = { type = 12700 id = 68 } name = "No.3 Group 'Niet zonder arbyt'" type = strategic_bomber }}

Alek
 
Last edited:
Firstly must say that I am really enjoying this mod. Easily the best out of some I have tried.

Quick question, im playing as Germany in DD on the 36 campaign and when I build coastal forts on the coast of France I am seeing the symbol on the province to show that a fort has been built but in the province details no fort level is showing. Does it take a long time to appear ? or is this a minor bug ? Just wanted to know if I am wasting time and IC in building these.

Thanks and continue the great work.
 
Der Bismarck said:
It their a spreadsheet with all the data for the brigades & divisions available?
Click to expand...
Yes, but there will be changes with the next version. I can send it to you, once the next version is out.
Hawke1973 said:
Quick question, im playing as Germany in DD on the 36 campaign and when I build coastal forts on the coast of France I am seeing the symbol on the province to show that a fort has been built but in the province details no fort level is showing. Does it take a long time to appear ?
Click to expand...
From v0.46:
-land and coastal forts now increase by 0.25 steps, time devided by 4

So you need 4 builds to have one fort.
 
Last edited:
Panther G said:
One question the US light cruiser Raleigh, commissioned in 1922, is currently model 1, shouldn't the whole class be model 0?
Click to expand...

Thats a hard one, the Omaha class were commissioned from post WW I but before 1930

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha_class_cruiser

Ships in the class were the Omaha, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Raleigh, Detroit, Richmond, Concord, Trenton, Marblehead and Memphis.

These ships were commissioned from February 24, 1923 (Omaha) to February 04 1925.

I'd call them more of a 1930 model than a 1918 but you could argue it either way.

Rook
 
Some observations on brigades

May I suggest combining AA & SP AA brigades. As they are, there is little difference/reason to build AA if you can build SP AA.

In the combined brigade; Model 0 could be AA; and SP AA begin with Model 1 on.

The saved Brigade could be used for Special/exotic weapons add ons.
(Ex. Siege guns, Amph. landing craft, Specific enviroment equipment (winter weather gear (Skis) , Jungle fighting gear, etc); 'Funny" weapons (which would nullify Fortifications); etc.)

++++++++

Also regarding Engineers, could you consider including a Logistics Engineers brigade, perhaps tied into the Frontline Supply Tech, which increases max speed of the attached unit. It represents a Transportation Brigade attached to a division to increase its mobility. My uncle served in one such unit it WW2 supplying Patton in Europe in 1944-45. The unit had no weapons (except sidearms & carbines), just 2.5 ton trucks to move supplies speedly.

Stats would look something like this

Logistics Engineer

cost = 0.81
buildtime = 35
manpower = 0.9
maxspeed = +1
supplyconsumption = 0.045
Fuelconsumption = 0.05

++++++++++

Consider another couple of Police Units. Suggestion:
Model 0: Basic (what we have already)
Model 1: Advanced
Model 2: Special (NKVD, FBI, Gestapo)
 
Der Bismarck said:
May I suggest combining AA & SP AA brigades. As they are, there is little difference/reason to build AA if you can build SP AA.
Click to expand...
SP AA is 20% better for AD and AA and they make a lot sense as mobile units attachments. Paradox has thrown together both types, but they should not. Most part of the armor tree was done by Keldor (he was at the army) and I fully support his "brigade" picks.

A speed bonus is very problematic, if you can attach the unit to a leg unit with max speed = 3 and a fast unit with max speed = 10, that's why HIP is very cautious with speed boni and mali.
The other question is, how does the attachment speed up the division? A recon battalion can carry a few soldiers, but certainly not the whole unit. An engineer unit should speed up crossing a river, but not increase "normal" movement.

The question on police, would be, how do they get better with higher models?
 
Last edited:
Panther G said:
The other question is, how does the attachment speed up the division?
Click to expand...

Tha attachment sped up the division by assigning it motorized transportation (trucks) which it otherwise did not organically possess.

The trucks could move foot soldiers which otherwise had to walk. Assigned to armour units, it kept them fully supplied with fuel & spares to minimize downtime.
 
Panther G said:
The question on police, would be, how do they get better with higher models?
Click to expand...


They get better by having better "supression" capability; thus reflecting better training & experience at L&O, counter insurgency, and infiltration of partisan cells; as in real life.

Here is a website for the US Army MP school, where they offer classes at various levels:

http://www.wood.army.mil/usamps/default.htm

Again, the NKVD, Gestapo, FBI, etc. all had roles in anti-partisan activity.
 
Panther G said:
I have discovered a problem with CVL '36 class for Japan, it should not be "Ryujo" class, because the Ryujo is classified as a CV '30 with 48 aircraft. Any other suggestions?
Click to expand...

Hmm, my notes show the carrier with only 38 aircraft. She was commissioned on 05-09-33 but was reworked several times in the mid 30's due to design issues.

Here are some of the web links that list only 38 AC on her:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_aircraft_carrier_Ryujo
http://www.combinedfleet.com/ryujo_c.htm
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/ijn_cv.htm#ryuj

I do have two sources that list her with 48 AC (one website and one book) but I have several articles in my books that say he carried more than her compliment of airplanes when she was shuffling AC around to bases but that she was acting as a transport for AC in those cases...

So I think here classification is correct? What do you guys think?

Rook
 
Der Bismarck said:
They get better by having better "supression" capability; thus reflecting better training & experience at L&O, counter insurgency, and infiltration of partisan cells; as in real life.
Click to expand...
The main question is, if there is enough difference between e.g. police '36 and police '44.
Der Bismarck said:
Could you combine the AA brigades, by having Model 0-4 represent normal AA
& models 5-9 represent SPAA, thus saving a Brigade category altogether?
Click to expand...
No, you also need one blank model between to prevent upgrades and the AI would only have one type available (it has to abandon the other).

rook,

38 or 48 aircraft, both would "allow" her to be classified as carrier. I would prefer to use a smaller CVE or CVL for the class name.
 
Last edited:
Reading in HIP Base.txt and see:

"1 HOI2 ship = 1 real ship (all except destroyer and submarine)
1 HOI2 destroyer = 5 real destroyer
10 Escort = 10 destroyers (DD model 1)"


and in the convoy_costs.txt file:

escorts = {
cost = 9.48
buildtime = 250
manpower = 2.2
(total of 2370 IC/Days)


Yet, the Destroyer.txt file calls for DD1 as
cost = 11.85
buildtime = 100
manpower = 1.65
(Total of 1185 IC/Days)

Is this correct? Shouldn't 2 DD1 units = 1 CONVOY ESCORT
 
Panther G said:
38 or 48 aircraft, both would "allow" her to be classified as carrier. I would prefer to use a smaller CVE or CVL for the class name.
Click to expand...

Panther,

Not an issue at all, but I thought the definition we were using was for CVL and CV was:

1 HOI2 carrier = has 45 or more aircraft (in special cases only 36)
1 HOI2 escort_carrier = 18 to 44 aircraft (in special cases up to 54)

So at 38 AC I put here class as a CVL, in most locations I've also found her listed as a light carrier.

See below: http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/ijn_cv.htm#ryuh
(this site has this carrier listed with only 31 AC, 90% of my sources had her at 38 and the rest at 48 AC)

But if we want to move this carrier from a CVL to CV, I'll see what other classes we could use for the 36 CVL model.

The final call (of course) is up to you all ;)

Rook
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back