Development Diary #10 - 17th of December 2008

[Alex_brunius]

Would most catapult-launched planes have range long enough to cover sea zones adjacent to the one the ship is in? That could give them a potential application at this scale. Otherwise, they can be assumed to be abstracted, as they were a pretty standard piece of equipment on larger ships, it seems.

Without a doubt.

Japanese standard: Aichi E13A had a range of 2,100 km, Thats further than all their Carrier based bombers as compairson.

HoI2 standard seem to cut the range in 5 roughly due to return trips and combat exc. So in HoI2 terms such seaplanes from CA/BBs would have around 400km range. 1-3 seazones depending on where you are, probably more in HoI3 since we are promised alot more seazones.

It would be nice if Seaplane scouts and CAGs actually measured the correct range so you could see all seazones they could range from the fleet. Patroll missions should also have all aircraft patrolling seazones in range I hope.

[Gigalocus]

I have not played that MOD -- link?

To Arma? Cos that wasn't a MOD, it was an 'expansion'

[Snowmelk]

Several people said that they are skeptical about the new, detailed ship design system. Honestly, I don't really understand why.

The argumentation seems to be that the generic classes of HoI2 let you assume that there are different ships, but they fall all into a few model categories, because no detailed stats were specified, whereas in the new system, everyone will build the best possible, and thus often unhistorical, build.

First of all, in HoI2 you did research five tech components for every ship design, usually containing main armament size etc., so that the models weren't in fact that unspecific than people say they were.

Second, enough people have posted stats in this thread of ships falling in one HoI2 model category, showing that there were sometimes big differences in armament, armor, etc. Despite that, in HoI2 all these ships were absolutely the same. Do you really think this is the better choice?

Finally, you also assume that
a) the AI will always build the best possible ship system, ignoring historical ship types, despite the fact that we already know that for land units the AI will build different, historical divisions. What makes you assume that this will NOT be true for naval units?
b) there IS something like one best build. Johan said several times now that they spend quite some work on the naval system, and assuming that there is only one best build implies that Paradox fails to implement good trade-offs between armor-speed, armor-armament, etc., allowing for more than one feasible build.

I understand that as long as we don't know all the details we can't exclude all these points. I also understand that some of you are very excited about the naval side of the game, and hope for significant improvements (me too). Still, it seems that you are describing the worst case scenario, that for all that we know, is probably very unlikely.

It just seems funny (no, not really funny, maybe just strange) that people complain about generic models in HoI2 for years, and now that Paradox announces that they will implement more details, allowing different ship builds in HoI3, people start to complain about that.

[Veldmaarschalk]

I have not played that MOD -- link?

It is not a mod, it is an official boosterpack for HoI2-Doomsday

You can buy it at GamersGate

[Terran Noble]

Well, to be fair, it was a boosterpack and not an expansion. But don't let me derail this topic with semantics.

[aaaaburnHOI]

One of the most important "what-ifs" was the Battle of Leyte Gulf. If Kurita Takeo had the nerve to push on, he would have massacred the hundreds of transports in the Gulf, giving a major victory that could have gotten Japan a conditional peace.

I would have been a major tactical naval win for the IJN. Sorry to say, though, the USA would not be accepting anything but an unconditional surrender from Japan. The USA would replenish its losses faster than Japan could recover and continue the battle for the Philippines. The USA built more tonnage in warships during 1943, than Japan had in warship tonnage at the start of WWII.

[Adm. Spruance]

I would like to see CV's and planes will be built separately and you can deploy carrier type aircraft on CV's (wasn't this possible in HOI I?) and the B-25 Mitchell on CV's for the Doolittle Raid, etc = more realism. Also, get rid of the rebasing of planes with limited range for long distances. I shouldnt be able to rebase the F4F Wildcat from Manila to Washington DC in a matter of days. They must be transported via ship. These should need to be delivered by plane tender or CV to the appropriate air base unless they have the range to fly there IMHO.

[aaaaburnHOI]

I would like to see CV's and planes will be built separately and you can deploy carrier type aircraft on CV's (wasn't this possible in HOI I?) and the B-25 Mitchell on CV's for the Doolittle Raid, etc = more realism. Also, get rid of the rebasing of planes with limited range for long distances. I shouldnt be able to rebase the F4F Wildcat from Manila to Washington DC in a matter of days. They must be transported via ship. These should need to be delivered by plane tender or CV to the appropriate air base unless they have the range to fly there IMHO.

I have always thought the CAG was not as good as multiple CAWs. That way, you could mix and match (HOI3 maybe...). TBD Carrier Air Wing, FTR CAW, TAC CAW. Guess Paradox just wanted the ease of 1 CAG per CV. Im hoping though... MYO divisions= MYO carrier air groups

[Alexander Seil]

I would like to see CV's and planes will be built separately and you can deploy carrier type aircraft on CV's (wasn't this possible in HOI I?) and the B-25 Mitchell on CV's for the Doolittle Raid, etc = more realism. Also, get rid of the rebasing of planes with limited range for long distances. I shouldnt be able to rebase the F4F Wildcat from Manila to Washington DC in a matter of days. They must be transported via ship. These should need to be delivered by plane tender or CV to the appropriate air base unless they have the range to fly there IMHO.

Or just a transport. I imagine B-17's didn't fly from the continental US to the Philippines...

What would be more interesting is not the Doolittle Raid (contrary to what the History Channel feeds its audience, that's not what's important), but rebasing CAG's on airfields in case their carriers get sunk (or while waiting for the carrier to launch). They could act as "mini-wings" with maybe 1/3 as much maximum strength as regular air wings (but the stats themselves being comparable).

[aaaaburnHOI]

Or just a transport. I imagine B-17's didn't fly from the continental US to the Philippines...
What would be more interesting is not the Doolittle Raid (contrary to what the History Channel feeds its audience, that's not what's important), but rebasing CAG's on airfields in case their carriers get sunk (or while waiting for the carrier to launch). They could act as "mini-wings" with maybe 1/3 as much maximum strength as regular air wings (but the stats themselves being comparable).

Sometimes they did fly, but they would have to stop at various air bases along the way. HOI leaves that part out - non-stop straight flight city...

[Khevenhuller]

Or just a transport. I imagine B-17's didn't fly from the continental US to the Philippines...

What would be more interesting is not the Doolittle Raid (contrary to what the History Channel feeds its audience, that's not what's important), but rebasing CAG's on airfields in case their carriers get sunk (or while waiting for the carrier to launch). They could act as "mini-wings" with maybe 1/3 as much maximum strength as regular air wings (but the stats themselves being comparable).

Certainly. A large number of Fleet Air Arm squadrons were based ashore as a matter of course. In the desert they proved to be better at navigating than the RAF as they were more used to flying over featureless expanses.

K

[Adm. Spruance]

but rebasing CAG's on airfields in case their carriers get sunk (or while waiting for the carrier to launch). They could act as "mini-wings" with maybe 1/3 as much maximum strength as regular air wings (but the stats themselves being comparable).

Another excellent idea! Also as was mentioned I would like to deploy say 4 CAW (size based on tech) on a large CV and decide how many are FTR, Dive Bomber and Torpedo Bomber.

[Cpack]

Another excellent idea! Also as was mentioned I would like to deploy say 4 CAW (size based on tech) on a large CV and decide how many are FTR, Dive Bomber and Torpedo Bomber.

Yes, and this specific mixture decides your mission efficiency against naval target, ships, harbor, airports....like "more torpedobomber, better performance against ships, but weaker against land or strategic targets"

[Braedonnal]

Its design was changed drastically after Jutland though ... But never mind, Paradox is always right

Looking fab

Yet not changed enough for the DNC in 1920 to note she was still quite vulnerable to plunging fire, and on certain areas on the upper belts, to standard fire.

I have to agree though, this update has some fantastic news for naval warfare in the game. Naturally, I won't be happy until I see what is in store for naval aviation and those nations pursuing guerre de course of the submersible variety.

[Kahless]

I am really excited by this but we are still missing sub warefare which i felt was done poorly in HoI2 and of course carrier warfare I can wait for.

I am hoping that inporved decrption can give general location information to the locatons of enemy fleets.

[magic032]

Johan,
Would Paradox consider some form of replenishment, re-supply, and/or re-fuel time delay for ships and fleets once they return to port? As I recall, In HoI2DD ships or fleets can leave port with new orders the moment they have returned to port for any reason.

This may seem abstract, however, it may be possible for this to be a factor when considering tactical aspects of naval warfare.

[Dark Scipio]

Sounds great! Perhaps it will be much harder to do a a Operation Seelöwe now.

But the Models look aweful, best thing would have been 2D.

[wulfhund]

I really like the way this is described, been a fan since HOI 1 and still think the game is probably the best WWII grand strategy game there is.

Just out of curiousity though, is the new system robust enough to include the possibility of the Sen Toku fleet (or even just the original 3 subs)? If so, will it be in the release or will someone have to mod it in.

[llib]

...as for the main guns, you used the Scharnhorst in the comparison, his sister Gneisenau was during war underway to rearm its main batteries to Bismarck type ones, since both ships were planned for them originally but they took too long so smaller ones were fitted...
HMS Warspite has it's main guns elevation was also modified in modernisation, strongly affecting maximum range.
Japanese built some "light cruisers" in way that would allow them heavy cruiser guns, and replaced them before war as planned.
Some old cruisers have had their armament replaced completely, from old open mounts to new ones, sometimes including replacement for more barrel turrets.
Many UK destroyers had the one turret of main batteries replaced by dual-purpose or AA gun during the war.
That is just few things in mind.

Still, system as you wrote is still by difference of magnitude better than one in HOI2 and also better than one in first HOI. I hope there will be modernisation with micromanagement, taking time to upgrade the ships, possibly depending on severity of modification(new torpedo protection takes probably more time than extra few AA light guns).

[Alexander Seil]

The only problem is that the Gneisenau never completed the upgrade, so the argument is weakened. I'm not sure how to balance this. The real problem here seems that the particulars of whether an upgrade would be viable or not depends on the engineering details of the ship that the game abstracts away.

Also, reading up on the Yamashiro, which had new boilers fitted, among other things, the whole process took FIVE years, from 1930 to 1935. That's as good as rebuilding the ship whole.