It's a morale hit to the population. This is currently easiest to represent as a dissent hit. The reason changes, but the effect of lower overall efficiency would be similar.
-
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.
If I loose the pride of the fleet among others the IC is affected: That means what? Workers on strike? Workers that sleep on the factories?
Afterwards in order to bring dissent down I need to poor the country with consumer goods. That means what? For example I'm a Nazi and I'm ruling by killing and like. To the families of killed/beaten/jailed people I'm so kind to offer a nice washing machine. Hence dissent is gone because they love me.
Last edited:
No it can also represents workers that don't have as much faith in their leadership anymore and thus won't do their uttermost to aid the nation, like sign up to volunteer to work 12hours a day instead of 10 for example.
Just like the nation being able to provide material things for them, even if still being at war can restore that faith yet again. Perhaps things are not going so bad afterall if our nation can actually afford to produce these things as well as all what is needed for the war?
But now I think were abit to far off topic for a development diary about naval changes to be arguing dissent mechanics, don't you think?
Have you some data on that? Is in your knowledge happened that the loss of the Bismarck/Hood had that effect in Germany/UK?
I thought that the discussion is/was on the consequences of losing a pride ship. Is my understanding correct?
Have you any data that it didn't?
No to be exact we are now arguing about if we are arguing about dissent mechanics or about pride off the fleet mechanics.
I'm loving the new ability to manually put in convoys to locations of choice. This should greatly fix most players gripes about supplying invasions.
No but from war production statistics I cannot see that. But maybe you can help.
You were arguingNo to be exact we are now arguing about if we are arguing about dissent mechanics or about pride off the fleet mechanics.
I'm just interested to understand how the loss of a ship can impact the production of the spitfires.
About the fleet passing through ennemy strait. It can (sometimes) be done manually this way: rebase to a port then holding shift + click on a sea province (such as u're doing it for waypoints). However once u're into the Med u're stuck if you cancel the moving order. Doing this also provide the player unlimited naval range.
Sorry if this have been said before, didn't go through the whole thread.
The exact order command line i gave to get this. Fleet was in Plymouth, Ger controled Gib, Ita controled Suez. Ordered fleet to rebase to a port in the arabic peninsule (can't remember the name of those provinces, one close to Yemen), hold shift and click into Suez, the road appeared to suddenly go throught Med whereas before it was going all around Africa (i did that when the fleet was about Mauritania/Ivory Coast, but i guess that works wherever the fleet is), as i noticed that i just shift+click a Med sea province et voila, fleet in the Med. However once it's been in there and finished its move, was enable to do anything.
Hope it helps.
Sorry if this have been said before, didn't go through the whole thread.
The exact order command line i gave to get this. Fleet was in Plymouth, Ger controled Gib, Ita controled Suez. Ordered fleet to rebase to a port in the arabic peninsule (can't remember the name of those provinces, one close to Yemen), hold shift and click into Suez, the road appeared to suddenly go throught Med whereas before it was going all around Africa (i did that when the fleet was about Mauritania/Ivory Coast, but i guess that works wherever the fleet is), as i noticed that i just shift+click a Med sea province et voila, fleet in the Med. However once it's been in there and finished its move, was enable to do anything.
Hope it helps.
Last edited:
And just like ENTERPRISE was the pride of the US fleet. This is a really cool idea but it is silly if it is really restricted to BC and BB. Based on the explanation for what "Pride of the Fleet" represents, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to make a carrier the pride of the fleet.
I'm just interested to understand how the loss of a ship can impact the production of the spitfires.
Just think about some of your resources and personell having to be devoted to propaganda, making the loss of what was once described as your mighty ship seem less disasterous. There are plenty of other dissent hits in game that don't make a lot of sense, like Germany getting 5% dissent from annexing Austria.
Well I hate to bust your bubble there skippy, But the US had TWO 1000 ship fleets in two actions in June of 44, D-Day and Saipan. And that does not account for the rest of the ships in the US Navy.
And before someone else makes a silly statement that supporting invasions is not naval combat I have three battles for you, Marianas Turkey Shoot, Iron Bottom Sound, and Suriago Strait.
All three took place due to their SUPPORTING invasions.
And finally, lets remember the famous saying one German officer purportedly said, in disbelief, "It's impossible... there can't be that many ships in the world."
Cheers, Thor
Question though - while there were 1000 ships - how many of those were actually the landing craft used by the marines hitting the shore, which are represented by transports, not actual combat vessels? How many actual combat vessels which would be represented by units in the game were there?
Well, the Turkey Shoot/Saipan was probably only within the range of 150 or so actual combat vessels (at least Submarine/Destroyer and on up). I know the Turkey Shoot had about a 100 on the US side, and the Battleship fleets remained back in Saipan. Definitely not near 1000 though.
Although to a certain extent the idea is sound. Consider the NVR currently lists the US Navy at about 225 active in-service combat ships (254 - Support and Reserves), and the Navy by 44 was easily several times (At least 2x, but I'd probably go with 4-5x) larger in the DD/SS and up levels.
Edit: Ah, here we go, wikipedia provides one again:
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/USNatWar/USN-King-B.html
The US added, note that is ADDED and thus doesn't count what it started with, 1320 ships of DD/SS size and up from the moment bombs hit Pearl to the end of hostilities. Tack on some couple hundred for pre-war counts, and start tacking on ships of significant size that aren't combatants (Supply, Tenders, Transports, etc..) and you can easily hit 2k. Maybe not all in those two battles, but still...
Last edited:
Per your link:
Built post 1941:
8 BB
15 CA
33 CL
18 CV
9 CVL
110 CVE
349 DD (Not going to get into the DDEs)
203 SS
745 ships total that would have counters for HOI III (Principal Combat Vessels)
Per: http://www.navsource.org/Naval/usf.htm the number of Principal Combat Vessels in the fleet as of Dec 7, 1941 was 345
Of those, many of the CVEs were sent to Britain, about 27% of builds are subs, and how many ships were on patrol in the Atlantic? How many weren't included in the battle in question?
I would think to get to the 1000 mark for a fleet for a single assault in the Pacific, much smaller vessels than we are dealing with in HOI III are being counted (as well as support vessels), as well as perhaps some of the LSTs, etc.
Built post 1941:
8 BB
15 CA
33 CL
18 CV
9 CVL
110 CVE
349 DD (Not going to get into the DDEs)
203 SS
745 ships total that would have counters for HOI III (Principal Combat Vessels)
Per: http://www.navsource.org/Naval/usf.htm the number of Principal Combat Vessels in the fleet as of Dec 7, 1941 was 345
Of those, many of the CVEs were sent to Britain, about 27% of builds are subs, and how many ships were on patrol in the Atlantic? How many weren't included in the battle in question?
I would think to get to the 1000 mark for a fleet for a single assault in the Pacific, much smaller vessels than we are dealing with in HOI III are being counted (as well as support vessels), as well as perhaps some of the LSTs, etc.
As already pointed out, DDs and SS are represented as flotilla in HoI, so you can cut that number by a factor of ~10. CVEs are really not well represented in HoI, my guess would be that they are "just" converted merchant ships for escort duty. That would be abstracted in HoI as well, as convoy escorts.
You're right, even after all this, that still leaves about ~100 counters for your list. But you're missing the most important thing: it's a game. The rules should help simulate fun encounters, not faithfully recreate only a single battle of this size.
Consider changing the stacking rules to fit that one, single battle, all other battles would be unbalanced/unrealistic!
Religious Logic FTW
Anyway I think every ship in the fleet could be the pride of the fleet, but only 10% EXP bonus for the Pride of the Fleet?
I think little additional boni would be good
For PI:About unlimited naval range for AI.
I´m not into the coding stuff, but here is some ideas from me:
1: If the AI´s ships don´t have the range to a place(island), then they should check to see if they can research a better ship with better range in the techs. Then they can be able to reach their target.
2: If they don´t have the range then they should look for a friendly port that is nearer to where they would like to go or ,build one closer or last take one from the enemy that is closer to their goal, until they can reach their target.
3. Maybe they could take a place with airborne troops as well if that port is in range for paratroopers.
This way they don´t have to cheat with unlimited range.
This if how a human player have to do
/Marine
I´m not into the coding stuff, but here is some ideas from me:
1: If the AI´s ships don´t have the range to a place(island), then they should check to see if they can research a better ship with better range in the techs. Then they can be able to reach their target.
2: If they don´t have the range then they should look for a friendly port that is nearer to where they would like to go or ,build one closer or last take one from the enemy that is closer to their goal, until they can reach their target.
3. Maybe they could take a place with airborne troops as well if that port is in range for paratroopers.
This way they don´t have to cheat with unlimited range.
This if how a human player have to do
/Marine
Pride of fleet:
-CV for sure
-Consider also letting the POF be a cruiser, or the newest capital ship of a nation.
Minors without BB/BC or naval air powers like JAP, US, UK would probably designate the POF differently.
-CV for sure
-Consider also letting the POF be a cruiser, or the newest capital ship of a nation.
Minors without BB/BC or naval air powers like JAP, US, UK would probably designate the POF differently.
Or how about any ship in general? If someone is foolish enough (or brave enough) to risk making a level I DD the pride of the fleet, let them. I would think that this would also make the programmer's job easier. I could be wrong.
Yea, if I am playing a minor then a DD might be my largest ship that is new. So why not?
Because a PoF should be the biggest baddest ship on the block, capable of defeating any challenge presented to it in the minds of its crew and pretty much entire nation as well.
You can point at many possible PoF's during history and none I'm aware of was anything less than a ship of the line/battleship.
I would also argue carriers shouldn't be able to become PoF's as the rise of carriers in fact killed the whole PoF concept.
I'm not aware of any specific US carrier being hailed as the pride of the US navy, ever.
No... if a pride unit is sunk the people get demoralized.
How would one ship sinking effect the organization of "something else"?