• 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.
A little detail that wasent quite clear to me.

You would gain a research and production efficency boost based on what you make. Awsome idea.

However, is this based on what is currently being made or what you have already made, or a combination of both?

If the first, then that means for example that you would have to constantly be making tank divisions in order to recieve the research bonus for tanks and to keep your production bonus for them in case you needed to make more. Even after 5 years of war and if you have 30 panzer divisions, then you would still need to be making more to keep the bonuses, even if you didnt need more tanks.

If the latter, then you would recieve your research and production bonuses once you built up your panzers, and never lose them so long as you never lose your divisions "in comabt", even if youve switched entierly to the production of aircraft.

Is there some detail that I have missed that would avoid these flaws?
 
all of a sudden, you stop producing tanks, you lay off skilled personel, and you sell machinery for making something else instead. Doesn't seem cheesy to me that you lose capability in tank making & research then.....Even if you stay a master in art of using it. :eek:o
 
el_slapper said:
all of a sudden, you stop producing tanks, you lay off skilled personel, and you sell machinery for making something else instead. Doesn't seem cheesy to me that you lose capability in tank making & research then.....Even if you stay a master in art of using it. :eek:o

Im not saying its cheesy, Im asking which way does the game work?

Does it count what your making at the time, or what you have already made? Or perhapes is it a combination of both?

Besides just cause youve stoped making new divisions doesnt mean all those workers would go idle, and they would be busy replacing/upgrading the tanks in those divisons.
 
Maybe upgrading your divisions should keep your research bonus, even if you don't produce new units? The factories are running and new technologies and doctrines are tested.
 
Johan said:
the plan is that you should see it on the map.

Sounds great to see the wheather effect right on the map during playing.

Will snow and frost still be snow and frost like in HoI2 or will there be more variation in the types of wheather?

With variation i mean that a winter in Russia is often very diffrent then one in the west of Europe...
 
The Starfox said:
A little detail that wasent quite clear to me.

You would gain a research and production efficency boost based on what you make. Awsome idea.

However, is this based on what is currently being made or what you have already made, or a combination of both?

If the first, then that means for example that you would have to constantly be making tank divisions in order to recieve the research bonus for tanks and to keep your production bonus for them in case you needed to make more. Even after 5 years of war and if you have 30 panzer divisions, then you would still need to be making more to keep the bonuses, even if you didnt need more tanks.

If the latter, then you would recieve your research and production bonuses once you built up your panzers, and never lose them so long as you never lose your divisions "in comabt", even if youve switched entierly to the production of aircraft.

Is there some detail that I have missed that would avoid these flaws?
The way I read it, it works kinda like tradition in EU3. So if you build 30 panzer divisions, you'll get some bonus. Once you stop, the bonus will remain, but slowly decrease. so if you stop producing for a month or two, the effect might not be especially noticeable, but if you stop producing panzers in '39 and start again '44, you probably won't have any of the bonus left.
 
Johan said:
We're not entirely ready to show the production interface, but here is a screenshot of northwestern germany, where you can see how detailed in amount of provinces the map is becoming.
We still don't see anything water-related. Will naval provinces become smaller as well? I sincerly hope so, from various reasons underlined in the thread in my sig.

As for production, will IC be more "local"? Without need to transport resources back to homeland if factories are available locally? This would simplify capital encirclements, unit deployment afterwards (no more German battleships created in Yugo shipyards ;) ), supply problems (efficency no more related to TC, but rather "infra" & "provinces from homeland" related).
 
Jolly good.

I like the idea. I think it will allow for a more balanced production approach. I think its only accurate to penalise massive IC changes in production. After all during the war each first rank nation had a broad spectrum of production units. First rank nations built ships, tanks and aircraft throughout the war. They did not stop after a few production runs and switch to say only naval development. Therefore I think the penalty is a good way of ensuring a degree of historical accuracy.

Map looks good as well. To be honest Paradox could make the map hideously ugly, the provinces could be squares and I would still play it... :) Looking forward to the next development diary. Cheers.
 
I like the idea a LOT too, I think it's great. A perfect balance between what we can maximumly expect from an AI to deal with and flexible enough for a player to have fun with but not loose the actual action what the game is about and that is battle, not micro-economics!

I was all for factories but had serious doubts how that would have worked out....

He, I dropped paras on all of Russias industries and conquered them in 2 months, I bombed them all through a clever way and their output went to 0... Nightmare basically, no matter how many bombs fell on Germany, production reached a peak in 1944, by streamlining production, elimination endless numbers of different types for all branches of the Wehrmacht and producing the same over and over again in lines.

If this system is well implemented, techs should increase build bonusses of weapons types, not increase IC, save game remembers the bonus :) and there is a real difference in % when you go i.e. all out on 1 specialism and catching up in build speed takes years compared to other nations that go all out on other areas, the bonus is well thought out/balanced and attached to specific techs, I think it will be award winning economics.

I like the map a whole lot, you shouldn't look at provinces with lines, it is not meant to be an area map, it is a way of simulating the 2nd world war and it is the next best thing to hexes which I find basically very boring and ugly in most games, even the new to be developped world in flames. This has style and looks like a dark, in crisis, screaming out world of the 1930's.

I think it will all be great, as HOI still keeps us busy with so many ways of modelling it ourselfs, and about which games can you say that these days... I've been trying out of curiosity weapons and warfare from strategic command, nice for an afternoon or 2... I have been playing paradox games for 8 years now, and I think most are brilliant in their depth.

Excellent development so far Johan, on the right track. This layout, with a killer AI, will stand so far out!
 
Kouak said:
3 IC types, it's not very complicated...

If we can transform an aircraft plant to a hull element plant, every player will be able to use all his IC in naval production...
There is no such thing as an "hull element plant". Ships are (for the most part) not built in shipyards. They are ASSEMBLED in shipyards, and even then not completely.

The hull comes from a steel foundry, the same one you get the steel for your tanks from.
The guns come from an armory, the same one you get your Artillery and Tank guns from.
Very little of what goes into a ship is specialized to ship only production.

Look at it a different way. During WWII airplanes were built by (and at) automobile factories.
 
Haha, I notice that Wilhemshaven is finally spelled correctly ... oh and my hometown has finally become a province ...

The room for maneouvering is just astonishing ...

The "technical expertise/practical experience" thing sounds intriguing ... I'm sure I'll hate it when playing the first couple of games, but in the long run it'll make a big contribution to game experience, no doubt ...
 
The Starfox said:
Does it count what your making at the time, or what you have already made? Or perhapes is it a combination of both?

Besides just cause youve stoped making new divisions doesnt mean all those workers would go idle, and they would be busy replacing/upgrading the tanks in those divisons.
This is probably something that Johan or King would have to answer.
 
I am curious about how certain things may play themselves out with the new research and production modifiers. Would National China get research bonuses for cranking out infantry?

It wouldn't seem right for China or Soviet Union to lead in infantry techs. Perhaps they can be limited by what research teams they have.
 
Ithron said:
Well, try yourself combining (if calculations are right) 13'000-15'000 events from 7-8 major mods, you'll probably want also the more id's the better, since adding smth to id's that have the same few starting digits is far easier then rewritting all the digits and event chains :) So, if it is mathematically hard, or computig wise un-wise, then nevermind, though if it's just a question of increasing the limit, then increase even to 20 digits would be great :) well, probably not many people need this anyway..

The solution to merging different ID sets isn't "more numbers", but namespaces.

So Paradox events go "base:1" to "base:1114", CORE events go "core:1" to "core:24713", TRP events "trp:1" to "trp:7561" and so on.
 
hendriks said:
I like the idea a LOT too, I think it's great. A perfect balance between what we can maximumly expect from an AI to deal with and flexible enough for a player to have fun with but not loose the actual action what the game is about and that is battle, not micro-economics!

I was all for factories but had serious doubts how that would have worked out....

He, I dropped paras on all of Russias industries and conquered them in 2 months, I bombed them all through a clever way and their output went to 0... Nightmare basically, no matter how many bombs fell on Germany, production reached a peak in 1944, by streamlining production, elimination endless numbers of different types for all branches of the Wehrmacht and producing the same over and over again in lines.

If this system is well implemented, techs should increase build bonusses of weapons types, not increase IC, save game remembers the bonus :) and there is a real difference in % when you go i.e. all out on 1 specialism and catching up in build speed takes years compared to other nations that go all out on other areas, the bonus is well thought out/balanced and attached to specific techs, I think it will be award winning economics.

I like the map a whole lot, you shouldn't look at provinces with lines, it is not meant to be an area map, it is a way of simulating the 2nd world war and it is the next best thing to hexes which I find basically very boring and ugly in most games, even the new to be developped world in flames. This has style and looks like a dark, in crisis, screaming out world of the 1930's.

I think it will all be great, as HOI still keeps us busy with so many ways of modelling it ourselfs, and about which games can you say that these days... I've been trying out of curiosity weapons and warfare from strategic command, nice for an afternoon or 2... I have been playing paradox games for 8 years now, and I think most are brilliant in their depth.

Excellent development so far Johan, on the right track. This layout, with a killer AI, will stand so far out!

While I am also a "factory" geek I always accept that most people expect a military simulation at first with a easy to learn economical model at second.

I still believe a good economical model is very important because this war was won first by industrial capability and second by the military.

Having said that I think Paradox has a quite clever system and even I would have loved a more complex model, it should play out well :)
 
I haven't seen this question asked yet, so sorry if devs have to answer it again. About combat. If combat system mainly stays the same, then it will mean that because of higher number of provinces, smaller countries will be unable to have units in all the provinces at the border. Thus, country with higher number of divisions will not only have easier invasion, but will simply be able to skip border provinces that have divisions. Historically, small nations were prepared to spread divisions more to cover all the boarder. I don't have the historical numbers at the moment, but it was something around having 1 division cover 2-5x longer border, then what big countries covered with 1 division. If there is no system of "spreading", "streaching" the division, so that historical army could cover historical border, then how will this work out? At least one example, of which I hope (as there allways seem to be those who think that no small countries participated or even existed during the ww2, as if they were in holidays on Mars), that involved people should be interested in, is Winter war where both sides had very different concentration of troops.
 
Ithron said:
I haven't seen this question asked yet, so sorry if devs have to answer it again. About combat. If combat system mainly stays the same, then it will mean that because of higher number of provinces, smaller countries will be unable to have units in all the provinces at the border. Thus, country with higher number of divisions will not only have easier invasion, but will simply be able to skip border provinces that have divisions. Historically, small nations were prepared to spread divisions more to cover all the boarder. I don't have the historical numbers at the moment, but it was something around having 1 division cover 2-5x longer border, then what big countries covered with 1 division. If there is no system of "spreading", "streaching" the division, so that historical army could cover historical border, then how will this work out? At least one example, of which I hope (as there allways seem to be those who think that no small countries participated or even existed during the ww2, as if they were in holidays on Mars), that involved people should be interested in, is Winter war where both sides had very different concentration of troops.

If anything, the game will be more realistic. Nation's didn't have highly concentrated numbers of troops on every inch of the border. There were holes or certain provinces not given priority for defense.
 
6354201 said:
If anything, the game will be more realistic. Nation's didn't have highly concentrated numbers of troops on every inch of the border. There were holes or certain provinces not given priority for defense.
Yeah, I think there is an interest here in reducing those huge stacks of units you used to get.
 
xtfoster said:
There is no such thing as an "hull element plant". Ships are (for the most part) not built in shipyards. They are ASSEMBLED in shipyards, and even then not completely.

The hull comes from a steel foundry, the same one you get the steel for your tanks from.
The guns come from an armory, the same one you get your Artillery and Tank guns from.
Very little of what goes into a ship is specialized to ship only production.

Look at it a different way. During WWII airplanes were built by (and at) automobile factories.


In 2008 maybe, but in 1936? I live in the north-east of England where ships were BUILT on the River Tyne and River Wear until the 1980's, when shipyards in the Far East who ASSEMBLED them made it too expensive to continue to build ships in the old way, and the yards closed.

The shipyards were situated on the two rivers, which are only a few miles apart. Engineering companies, such as Parsons, which built the huge steam driven turbines which powered the ships were within a mile or two, and a steel foundry was about 10 miles away in Consett, all surrounded by the Northumberland and Durham coalfield.

The idea that you could just convert the shipyards to airplane manufacture is just rubbish. Have you seen the size of a Battleship compared to a Spitfire? Here is a picture of one of the shipyards, Swan Hunters:

000EE412-E981-1243-A08880BFB6FA0000.jpg


I used to live right on the River overlooking those massive cranes. My house was built on the land where people are watching the launch of this ship:

451BEFDA-9AF5-A0B2-D883798C4200C27B.jpg


The cranes which could lift over 150 tons were truly awesome, but they have all gone now. :mad:

Because of the ready supply of iron and steel, and the engineering skills that existed in the area, armaments factories did exist in the area, including Vickers-Armstrong works close to the River Tyne, which produced artillery and later also some tanks. The Vickers-Armstrong works produced the naval guns for the warships produced on the Rivers, as they also owned a naval shipyard there. In 1939/40 they built HMS George V (which took part in the sinking of the Bismarck) and HMS Anson:

KGV%202.jpg


Vickers-Armstrong was a huge engineering company that had grown to include factories across the UK. The company's interests pre-war included railway carriage manufacturers in Birmingham, and it was these that were then converted to produce British tanks, such as the Mk I and II Cruisers, and the Valentine, not their works on the Tyne.

They also set-up production of airplanes at Brooklands Airfield (this would be within the Aldershot province in HOI3, southwest of London), from where they produced Vickers Wellington bombers. There was no airplane manufacture in the Tyne/Wear area AFAIK.

Another, manufacturer of airplanes, Hawker Siddeley, also produced airplanes at Brooklands, including the Hurricane. The Spitfire was designed by Supermarine who were a subsidiary of Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft) Ltd. Their main works was near Southampton on the south coast.

Engines for both planes were produced by Rolls-Royce, the car manufacturer, based in the Birmingham and Coventry area.

To help build the Spitfires in the numbers anticipated, a huge new facility was started in 1938 at Castle Bromwich near Birmingham, as a "shadow" to Supermarine's original factories in Southampton: the most modern machine tools then available were being installed two months after work started on the site. The project was at first managed and equipped by Morris Motors Ltd under an expert in mass construction in the motor-vehicle industry. It was funded by the government. Although the new factory had been completed in late 1939, continual problems were experienced in building a complete airframe. The Spitfire required skills and techniques outside the experience of the local labour force and a continual stream of changes were demanded by the RAF.

Finally, in May 1940, with no sign of a single Spitfire being built, the Minister of Aircraft Production took over Castle Bromwich for the government, sent in experienced management staff and experienced workers from Supermarine and Vickers-Armstrongs. In June 1940 10 Spitfires were built, 23 in July, in August they produced 37, and in September 56. These could hardly have affected the Battle of Britain which was already taking place, but it was to prove crucially important in the longer-term following bombing raids by the Luftwaffe in September 1940 which destroyed the Southampton factories. Over the next few years thousands of Spitfires were built at Castle Bromwich.

Very little of what goes into a ship is specialized to ship only production.

No-one can doubt that the steel could have been used to produce something else, but the shipyard that took that steel and the men who worked there were highly specialized.

It's not a "gearing" factor in converting to production of other units - the Tyne and Wear shipyards could never have been used for the mass production of small items like planes or tanks, never mind rifles and machineguns. Nor did the thousands of men who worked there have the skills necessary to build planes.

Anyone who thinks that large-scale aircraft, tank, or ship production can just be turned off and on is living in a fantasy land.

Sorry, Johan, but it really isn't enough that people are encouraged to maintain relatively constant flows of different types of units, rather than constantly swapping and changing. Other than perhaps the US and Canada, no country could significantly increase their own shipbuilding capacity even in a few years. The capacity in most of Europe was a product of geography and over 50 years of history. In many cases, much much longer, the Tyne had been a centre of shipbuilding from the 17th century. The existing shipyards could be swapped from producing merchant ships to warships, but nothing else.

Taking it to it's extreme we could have an HOI2 Hungary, land-locked in 1936, which captures Yugoslavia early in the game, and makes itself into a naval power by building ships, launching them along the Adriatic Coast. Ah yes, Dubrovnik that well-known shipbuilding city:

dubrovnik.jpg



Come on! Surely the developers can think of a mechanism that stops this sort of nonsense in HOI3. I can - since you did it in EUIII.