-
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.
- Status
Excellent.
What does Adapted to the latest Clausewitz version means ? Some new hidden feature or just more stability ?
--edit :
About Common Weapons of WWII I'll try to make a compatible version ASAP.
no further comment
As I said I will release the patch late August in order to have the most reports as possible and to really test it (since it will be the last patch I think).
--edit : I will make the counters look like the vanilla ones, I see your point and I think you are right.
--edit : I will make the counters look like the vanilla ones, I see your point and I think you are right.
Cags
Thanks for a nice mod. I'm enjoying the extra units a lot. I have a couple of observations regarding the extra cag units.
The construction of the new cags feels very expensive relative to an existing cag. I think that this is due to the shorter build time. Rather than building over the 500 days of the basic-cag, the reduced build times, of 160 days for the int-cag and 180 days for the dive-cag, mean that the player has to allocated a much larger chunk of IC to them. This means a player has allocated, on a daily basis, more IC to building a single cag than to building the carrier they go on. And the cag's will be ready for deployment a year or more before their carrier.
Maybe reducing the IC cost and increasing the build time would be an option. I feel that all carrier aircraft crew require extra training over their land based equivalents, thus the build time should be longer.
The nav-cag, while suffering from the above problem, is also, I believe, way too expensive. The overall cost of a nav-cag is 2.28 times that of a basic cag. Perhaps reducing the overal cost to 1.4 would make them better value. However, I believe that the total build cost over time is balanced at 1.28 times for an int-cag and 1.08 times for a dive-cag compared to a basic-cag.
Thanks for a nice mod. I'm enjoying the extra units a lot. I have a couple of observations regarding the extra cag units.
The construction of the new cags feels very expensive relative to an existing cag. I think that this is due to the shorter build time. Rather than building over the 500 days of the basic-cag, the reduced build times, of 160 days for the int-cag and 180 days for the dive-cag, mean that the player has to allocated a much larger chunk of IC to them. This means a player has allocated, on a daily basis, more IC to building a single cag than to building the carrier they go on. And the cag's will be ready for deployment a year or more before their carrier.
Maybe reducing the IC cost and increasing the build time would be an option. I feel that all carrier aircraft crew require extra training over their land based equivalents, thus the build time should be longer.
The nav-cag, while suffering from the above problem, is also, I believe, way too expensive. The overall cost of a nav-cag is 2.28 times that of a basic cag. Perhaps reducing the overal cost to 1.4 would make them better value. However, I believe that the total build cost over time is balanced at 1.28 times for an int-cag and 1.08 times for a dive-cag compared to a basic-cag.
Thank you very much, you will not make mistake believe me.
And thank you for your first class work,I cant imagine anymore to play Semper-Fi without your addon,like many other people here I am sure.!
Last edited:
SS Unit naming
Perhaps better to remove the 'Panzer-Div.' and the other unit types from the name file for these. So we get 2SS-Das Reich rather than have infantry divisions called Panzer divisions in their name. Just a minor flavour thing.
Perhaps better to remove the 'Panzer-Div.' and the other unit types from the name file for these. So we get 2SS-Das Reich rather than have infantry divisions called Panzer divisions in their name. Just a minor flavour thing.
This works as intended. I named the SS divisions from 1. to about 50. You can build them early as infantry and upgrade them to panzer and mech.
So, If I get the Complete Sprite Pack from Gamers Gate, I get the following Packs:
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE Infantry Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE 2 Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Japanese Infantry Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Music Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 US Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Infantry Spritepack
And then I would have all the sprite packs I need?
Edit: That gave me the sprite packs, but I also purchased the Common Weapons as well. I think I have everything now!
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE Infantry Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 GE 2 Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Japanese Infantry Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Music Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 US Sprite Pack
* Hearts of Iron 3 Soviet Infantry Spritepack
And then I would have all the sprite packs I need?
Edit: That gave me the sprite packs, but I also purchased the Common Weapons as well. I think I have everything now!
Last edited:
Is this coming onto Steam? I can't see it, using UK region of Steam. I'm only seeing the sprite packs and Semper Fi.
Agreed. It would be nice to use the real names without division type. After that you can continue with generic names like 37 SS division, 38 SS division and so forth...
Just installed with the patch, thanks! However, even after patching to 1.1, it seems the National Guard units are very expensive, unless I am missing something. I can understand them being more expensive than Garrison (with tech tradeoff, fair enough), but why are they more expensive than standard infantry? Also, they give (and maybe cost is based on) Militia practical, not Infantry practical, which if they are tied to Infantry tech, seems to be odd.
Where did you get the patch? It doesn't have a patch listed on Gamers Gate.
There should be a link to the exact post with the update in the first post. I try to keep it updated with any major news, since I fluked beating Devildread to announcing it
Confused a bit
1. I have really enjoyed Semper Fi 203b + the Common Weapons mod.
2. I know a revision/patch of Common Weapons is coming out before end of month.
3. Semper Fi 2.03 is out today? so will these all be compatable?
4. Also on Gamers Gate where I got Common Weapons there is NOT the usual registration number that I think gives me access to patches when they come out so I am not sure how I will update the Common Weapons mod.
5. I really am not computer literate so handling anything other than click on s is beyond me.:wacko::wacko:
1. I have really enjoyed Semper Fi 203b + the Common Weapons mod.
2. I know a revision/patch of Common Weapons is coming out before end of month.
3. Semper Fi 2.03 is out today? so will these all be compatable?
4. Also on Gamers Gate where I got Common Weapons there is NOT the usual registration number that I think gives me access to patches when they come out so I am not sure how I will update the Common Weapons mod.
5. I really am not computer literate so handling anything other than click on s is beyond me.:wacko::wacko:
Some minor feedback on a nice mod.
Defensiveness of Lt. Inf
What I can't wrap my mind around is why Lt. Inf got lower defensiveness than infantry and certainly paras. The trait is defined in the wiki as "A unit's ability to defend itself and not take damage".
That seems to be the stat of the day for the 82nd in Bastonge, the Green Devils in Monte Cassino or Frost's Battalion in Arnhem to name the most glaring examples. The problem here is that German paras in the mod is defined as Lt. Inf., even though they are rather similar to the other units above (not taking into account the ability to air drop, but that is not the issue here).
It is totally un-intuitive that Lt. inf. are worse off than plain inf. in this respect. In fact Marine units got the same value in Def. as Inf., which makes less sense when compared to paras. Marines if any unit trained with combat techniques which to an extent disregard if they took losses or not: goal first principle. Lt. inf should certainly not be worse than marines in this single respect.
I suggest that Lt. Inf. get 6 in def. That is not much more than the standard 5.33 which most foot line-troops got, but it still gets them more in line with the paras.
Let Lt. Inf represent Jäger Divisions
Furthermore. Lt. Inf as German unit should perhaps rather depict the Jäger divisions, rather than the Green Devils which was kind of more like paras even though they at time didn't have jump training. The Jäger divisions was in total 12, so there is a stronger case to let the Lt. inf. represent these units than just a variant of the German paras which anyway can be represented with the normal para units as the abstraction is at that level in this game.
The Lt. inf should as a Jäger unit get less terrain modifiers, not as good as Mt. troops in Hills/mountains, but get some small boni in other terrain (or more correctly less sever penalties than normal) and being in between Mt. troops and inf. in fire power.
Defensiveness of Lt. Inf
What I can't wrap my mind around is why Lt. Inf got lower defensiveness than infantry and certainly paras. The trait is defined in the wiki as "A unit's ability to defend itself and not take damage".
That seems to be the stat of the day for the 82nd in Bastonge, the Green Devils in Monte Cassino or Frost's Battalion in Arnhem to name the most glaring examples. The problem here is that German paras in the mod is defined as Lt. Inf., even though they are rather similar to the other units above (not taking into account the ability to air drop, but that is not the issue here).
It is totally un-intuitive that Lt. inf. are worse off than plain inf. in this respect. In fact Marine units got the same value in Def. as Inf., which makes less sense when compared to paras. Marines if any unit trained with combat techniques which to an extent disregard if they took losses or not: goal first principle. Lt. inf should certainly not be worse than marines in this single respect.
I suggest that Lt. Inf. get 6 in def. That is not much more than the standard 5.33 which most foot line-troops got, but it still gets them more in line with the paras.
Let Lt. Inf represent Jäger Divisions
Furthermore. Lt. Inf as German unit should perhaps rather depict the Jäger divisions, rather than the Green Devils which was kind of more like paras even though they at time didn't have jump training. The Jäger divisions was in total 12, so there is a stronger case to let the Lt. inf. represent these units than just a variant of the German paras which anyway can be represented with the normal para units as the abstraction is at that level in this game.
The Lt. inf should as a Jäger unit get less terrain modifiers, not as good as Mt. troops in Hills/mountains, but get some small boni in other terrain (or more correctly less sever penalties than normal) and being in between Mt. troops and inf. in fire power.
/subscribed
Some mod should really sticky this thread since it is support for a paid for dlc package.
Some mod should really sticky this thread since it is support for a paid for dlc package.
could not repeated too often: superb mod!
agree totally, I'm using it in my latest game and it adds just a bit of complication and a lot more flavour to the otherwise cookie-cutter armies ... brilliant stuff and nicely judged as to what is and what is excluded.
Mac Version
Is there a Mac compatible version? I have SF Mac vanilla but, when I try to download the SF version of this mod, all I get is hash.
Thanks.
fff
Is there a Mac compatible version? I have SF Mac vanilla but, when I try to download the SF version of this mod, all I get is hash.
Thanks.
fff
- Status