Tech tree extension project (TTEP)

[Kretoxian]

Fleet Carriers:Note: SCV/CVA means Super carrier vessel/Carrier vessel attack and CVB means Carrier vessel battle.

• 1st Gen CV (1921) <-- USS Lexington/HMS Eagle (1920)/Japanese Akagi or Kaga
• 2nd Gen CV (1931) <-- USS Ranger/HMS Courageous
• 3rd Gen CV (1934) <-- USS Yorktown/HMS Ark Royal/Japanese Soryu
• 4th Gen CV (1936) <-- USS Ranger/HMS Ilustrious/HMS Indomitable/Japanese Hiryu
• 5th Gen CV (1939) <-- HMS Implacable/Japanese Junyo
• 6th Gen CV (1941) <-- USS Essex/HMS Eagle/Japanese Taiho
• 7th Gen CVB (1943) <-- USS Midway/HMS Malta (design only)/Japanese Shinano?
• Space leaved intentionally in blank
• 1st Gen SCV/CVA (1948) <-- USS United States
• 2nd Gen SCV/CVA (1951) <-- USS Forrestal
• 3rd Gen SCV/CVA (1955) <-- USS Kitty Hawk/French Clemenceau
• 4th Gen SCV/CVA (1964) <-- USS John F. Kennedy
• Space leaved intentionally in blank
• 1st Gen CVN (1958) <-- USS Enterprise
• 2nd Gen CVN (1968) <-- USS Nimitz

Now that the second version will say goodbye to Light cag brigades, i thought i could recycle them into... destroyer escorts brigades attachable only to your transport flotillas. What do you think?

[razorbird789]

that would be interesting but without a carrier to land on wouldn't they have very limited range?? you could decrease the range of destroyers to the same as escort fighters if they have it attached but then there isn't much point in having it.....

[Smitzer]

Do you plan on making Carriers stronger?Because if you do it would be nice to increase a chance of naval bombers or subs to damage them.

I found carriers quite overpowered...but beside that great work i was quite surprised that Nimitz class is that old!

[Kretoxian]

that would be interesting but without a carrier to land on wouldn't they have very limited range?? you could decrease the range of destroyers to the same as escort fighters if they have it attached but then there isn't much point in having it.....

I think you don't understand how it works. A naval brigade can be moded to represent any kind of naval attachement without restrictions. And i think it makes a lot of sense to have a destroyer escort brigade (or named simply just "escort") that you could even attach them to various capital ships.

Do you plan on making Carriers stronger?Because if you do it would be nice to increase a chance of naval bombers or subs to damage them.

I found carriers quite overpowered...but beside that great work i was quite surprised that Nimitz class is that old!

I have not thought nothing yet about statistical values, but i think that a BB or a BC or even an AC should have the chance of sinking a CV (which i agree that they're too overpowered)

I took the year which the ship was layed down and supposedly designed. I know that there are various cases were the ship was designed but it was layed down many years after, but anyway, i think that it's the exception, not the general rule.

[razorbird789]

I think you don't understand how it works. A naval brigade can be moded to represent any kind of naval attachement without restrictions. And i think it makes a lot of sense to have a destroyer escort brigade (or named simply just "escort") that you could even attach them to various capital ships.

ah i see so you were aiming at making a destroyer brigade but for things like carriers and BB. I think it would be better to make it patrol boats if that's the case

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

Unless they are separate altogether?

[Kretoxian]

ah i see so you were aiming at making a destroyer brigade but for things like carriers and BB. I think it would be better to make it patrol boats if that's the case

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

Unless they are separate altogether?

Nope, i don't like very much the idea of incluying such small ships so that's another reason to keep them available only for transports, and limite them to destroyer escorts or, in some cases, frigates. I think that some countries like Italy or Japan used frigates instead of destroyers to protect their transports.

[Kretoxian]

Absinthe V0.1 Released!

Check the first post

How to install

• 1. Go to your Darkest hour\mods folder
• 2. Make a copy of Darkest hour full folder (it will take a while)
• 3. Rename that copied folder to something like "TTEP" or something like that
• 4. Extract the file into that TTEP folder and overwrite when prompted
• 5. Run DH launcher, select TTEP from mod lists and play

#################################
# Tech Tree Extension Project
# Changelog (v Alpha 0.1)
# By Kretoxian and some other helping people
#################################
-Tech Tree
	-Shrinked all infantry tech names  to fit the new buttons
	-Infantry
		*Cavalry
			-Reworked cavalry models, now from 1936 onwards there are no more cavalry divisions, only brigades.
	-Armor & Artillery
		*Heavy tanks
			-Added 1916 Heavy Tank
			-Added 1918 Heavy Tank
			-Added 1935 Heavy Tank
		*Light Tanks
			-Added 1941 Light Tank
			-Added 1942 Light Tank
			-Added 1951 Light Tank
			-Added 1966 Infantry Fighting Vehicle
		*Medium Tanks
			-Added 1918 Medium Tank
			-Added 1924 Medium Tank
			-Added 1930 Medium Tank
			-Added 1936 Medium Tank
			-Added 1932 Cavalry Tank
			-Added 1935 Cavalry Tank
			-Added 1936 Infantry Tank
			-Added 1938 Infantry Tank
			-Added 1940 Infantry Tank
			-Added 1942 Infantry Tank
			-Added 1944 Infantry Tank
		*Artillery
			-Added 1900 Artillery Gun
			-Added 1960 Artillery Gun
		*AA Brigades
			-Added 1900 (Improvised) AA Brigade
			-Added 1914 AA Brigade
			-Added 1915 AA Brigade
		*SP Anti Air
			-Added 1962 SPAA
		*Armoured Cars
			-Added 1902 Armoured Car
			-Added 1918 Armoured Car
			-Added 1938 Armoured Car
			-Added 1962 Armoured Car
		-Added Armoured Trains
		-Added Airborne Tanks
	-Naval
		*Light Cruisers
			-Added 1914 CL
			-Added 1917 CL
		*Battleships
			-Added 1891 Predreadnought
			-Added 1904 Semidreadnought
			-Added Coastal Battleships
		*Heavy submarines
			-Added 1925 Heavy Submarine
			-Added 1937 Heavy Submarine
			-Added 1943 Heavy Submarine
	-Aircraft
		*Naval Bombers
			-Added 1913 Naval Bomber
			-Added 1916 Naval Bomber
			-Added 1960 Naval Bomber
		*CAS
			-Added 1916 Light Bomber
			-Added 1917 Light Bomber
			-Added 1918 Light Bomber
			-Added 1922 Light Bomber
		*Escort Fighters
			-Added 1916 Escort Fighter
			-Added 1917 Escort Fighter
			-Added 1918 Escort Fighter
			-Removed two last models of Escort fighters unlocked by researching multirole fighters because in those years escort fighters ceased to exist
		*Strategic Bombers
			-Added Blimps
		-Added Naval Helicopters
		-Added Armed Helicopters
		-Added Light CAGs (replacing naval_improved_Hull_s)
	-Secret Weapons
		*Super Heavy Tanks
			-Added 1942 SH Tank
			-Added 1944 SH Tank
			-Added 1946 SH Tank
			-Added 1956 SH Tank
			-Added 1959 SH Tank
			-Added 1943 Landcruiser
			-Added 1944 Landcruiser
			-Added 1919 SH Tank
		*Strategic Bomber
			-Added Zeppelin Aircraft Carrier
		*Cavalry
			-Added Air assault Cavalry
		*Cavalry Brigade
			-Added attack helicopters
		*Heavy Submarines
			-Added 1945 Heavy Submarine
			-Added 1955 Heavy Helicopter Carrying Nuclear Submarine (came out just from my imagination)
		-Added Night Vision Techs
		-Added Space race techs
		-APCs Added
		-Anti ship missiles added (replacing naval_improved_hull_l)
	-Land Doctrines
		-Changed some effects on Sandhurst doctrines path in order to block their access to cavalry tank
		-Changed some effects on Blitzkrieg, Human wave and firepower focus to block their access to infantry tanks
	-Air Doctrines
		-Air superiority mission is now activated with air duel doctrine, this is only for WW1 gameplay purposes
		-Naval strike mission is activated with bomb-dropping technology, just to allow naval bombers to fly over the sea (in a patrol role), they will not cause very much damage to your ships, the naval strike efficiency is set at -3000 in this tech. 
		-In order to neutralize things, maritime attack tech now gives you +3000 efficiency in naval strike missions setting it's efficiency at 0% again.
-Units
	-Divisions
		-Sea units
			-Reworked range and speed values for every naval unit
		-Air Units
			-Reworked range and speed values for every aerial unit
	-Brigades
		
-Graphics
	-Added new icon for Light CAG
	-Added many new Tech pics
	-Reworked the size of the tech buttons allowing more space for new techs <-- Thanks JRHINDO!
	-New TC Icons <-- Thanks JRHINDO!
	-New model icons based on the old vanilla HOI2 and 1914 mod <-- Thanks to their mod leader, Arturius for his permission.
-Tech Teams
	-SOV
		-Added soviet helicopter tech teams.
-Ministers
	-BOL
		-Hector Bilbao Roja did not exist, but Bernardino Bilbao Rioja did, he commanded Bolivian Air Force during Chaco war, name and pic changed.
-Scenarios
	-1914
		-Adapted to new tech tree
		-Changed German naval aviation to 1913 naval bombers
		-Added more German Colonial troops (In Namibia, Cameroon and Togo)
		-Changed British Naval aviation to 1913 naval bombers
	-1933
		-Recounted both submarines and DDs, 10 DDs = 1 flotilla 10 SSs= 1 flotilla
		-Reorganized Argentinean Army (There's still work to do, i couldn't find info about Argentinean army in the 30s)
		-Added Argentinean submarine flotilla as a division development.
		-Added two Argentinean missing ACs.
		-Reworked both Bolivian army and air force
		-Added Brazilian Monitor Floriano (it was wrecked the next year)
		-Added Brazilian submarine flotilla and a heavy submarine
		-Added British Indian air force as a division development (it was created in 1933)
		-Kavaratti is now part of British Raj
		-Added Chilean Predreadnought Capitán Prat
		-Added Chilean air force
		-Added many seaplane tenders for Nationalist china, and various forgotten light cruisers.
		-Added French Submarine Surcouf in division development
		-Added Greek bb Kilkis (she was discarded in 1934)
		-Added Dutch De Zeven Provincien BB
		-Added Dutch Hertog Hendrik BB
		-Added Dutch Jacob van Heemskerck
		-Reworked Dutch East indies army.
		-Added Norwegian Coastal BBs
		-Reworked Both Paraguayan army and air force
		-Added many Swedish coastal BBs
		-More not loged changes (i honestly forgot some of them)

[JRHINDO]

btw I have done some thinking:
-WW1 tanks could either be called 'Land Ships' for flavor and to differenciate with the later "real" tanks, or simply 'Tanks' without the 'Heavy' prefix since those were the only design of tanks at the time. And how about making an 'AFV warfare theory' tech in the land doctrines around 1900s (or 1887 the year of the armored car prototype), similar to the 'tank division theory' tech, allowing the research of all armored motorized vehicles. Would make for a realistic requirement, as armored vehicles were seen as useless investment among the leadership of almost all nations who still believed in the superiority of the infantry.

-Maybe armored trains tech could give some minor logistic bonuses, since the trains would be less vulnerable to damage and send equipment up the lines faster.That would also be a nice research incentive.

-Also How about adding some infantry anti tank weapons techs? Like K bullets and anti tank grenades during ww1, then anti tank rifles (and a last grenade tech somewhere) from WW1 up to the practical use of anti tank artillery guns (and 1935 wouldnt be the right start, as in the early ww2 all countries still had great amounts of anti tank rifles).

-Also I dont really get how you built the cavalry/infantry tank lines. I understand infantry tanks as heavier, slower and better armed tanks serving as the modern land ships and giving birth to the MBTs. But then arent the cavalry tanks supposed to be the light tanks? More nimble and used to take advantage of gaps in the lines. So why does it go astray in 1930 and just end up in a dead end since the light tanks continued on?

[Arturius]

btw I have done some thinking:
-WW1 tanks could either be called 'Land Ships' for flavor and to differenciate with the later "real" tanks, or simply 'Tanks' without the 'Heavy' prefix since those were the only design of tanks at the time. And how about making an 'AFV warfare theory' tech in the land doctrines around 1900s (or 1887 the year of the armored car prototype), similar to the 'tank division theory' tech, allowing the research of all armored motorized vehicles. Would make for a realistic requirement, as armored vehicles were seen as useless investment among the leadership of almost all nations who still believed in the superiority of the infantry.

In WW1 there where already classification like light ('female') and heavy ('male'). Light tanks where equipped with MGs only, heavy tank had installed a gun additionally. Light tanks served as support tanks for heavy tanks. The tanks units were mixed. And don't forget the superheavy tanks which were designed in the end of WW1.

@Kretoxian: you should really join our forum, since we're working on the same subject.

[JRHINDO]

In WW1 there where already classification like light ('female') and heavy ('male'). Light tanks where equipped with MGs only, heavy tank had installed a gun additionally. Light tanks served as support tanks for heavy tanks. The tanks units were mixed. And don't forget the superheavy tanks which were designed in the end of WW1.

True, true. But then how to simulate this? Like you said tank units were mixed, so we dont even really have to simulate the situation. And I dont know anything on ww1 super heavy tanks.

[Arturius]

True, true. But then how to simulate this? Like you said tank units were mixed, so we dont even really have to simulate the situation.

I agree. Only the very early tank units of Britain were pure heavy tank formations.

And I dont know anything on ww1 super heavy tanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-Wagen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Elephant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Char_2C

[Kretoxian]

btw I have done some thinking:
-WW1 tanks could either be called 'Land Ships' for flavor and to differenciate with the later "real" tanks, or simply 'Tanks' without the 'Heavy' prefix since those were the only design of tanks at the time. And how about making an 'AFV warfare theory' tech in the land doctrines around 1900s (or 1887 the year of the armored car prototype), similar to the 'tank division theory' tech, allowing the research of all armored motorized vehicles. Would make for a realistic requirement, as armored vehicles were seen as useless investment among the leadership of almost all nations who still believed in the superiority of the infantry.

About that doctrine... i'll look into it. About tanks... that's why ww1 tank techs are named just like that, "tanks".

-Maybe armored trains tech could give some minor logistic bonuses, since the trains would be less vulnerable to damage and send equipment up the lines faster.That would also be a nice research incentive.

Not a bad idea... not a bad idea... *scratches his long beard in an interesting way*

-Also How about adding some infantry anti tank weapons techs? Like K bullets and anti tank grenades during ww1, then anti tank rifles (and a last grenade tech somewhere) from WW1 up to the practical use of anti tank artillery guns (and 1935 wouldnt be the right start, as in the early ww2 all countries still had great amounts of anti tank rifles).

For sure! expect it in the next version (centered mainly in the naval aspect of the game)

-Also I dont really get how you built the cavalry/infantry tank lines. I understand infantry tanks as heavier, slower and better armed tanks serving as the modern land ships and giving birth to the MBTs. But then arent the cavalry tanks supposed to be the light tanks? More nimble and used to take advantage of gaps in the lines. So why does it go astray in 1930 and just end up in a dead end since the light tanks continued on?

Wikipedia made a distinction between cavalry and light tanks, and so did i...

@Kretoxian: you should really join our forum, since we're working on the same subject.

Yes, sorry i simply forgot it... registering right now.

[mikey1871]

I think i'm going to release an absinthe (that's right, i'm using drinking names instead of the old traditional boring greek letters, why? just for fun) version just after i've finished adapting 1933 scenario because if i have to wait until every DH scenario have been adapted... there may pass a very long time...

Hey at least it's something different.. i thought i was drunk when i read the version name... LOL

[Smitzer]

Oh thank god for a absinthe shot!

Kretoxian: thx for the info about those carriers.

[Kretoxian]

The guys at the 1914 forum made me think about CVL, it would not be very realistical to tag early models as "CVL" simply because when they were formed (in the WW1) they were the only CVs out there, so there nothing to compare them with and there's no point to tag them as light, so i think that, the early models (except seaplane carriers) need another name, i would call them "Converted Carrier" (CCV) or somthing along those lines, what do you think?

Now, for the submarines:

Submarines:Note, technically SSN stands for Submarine Nuclear, but they are nuclear attack subs (ie, not missile launching subs but conventional attacking subs powered by a nuclear engine) while SSBN stands for submarine ballistic nuclear (missile)

• Experimental SS (1900) <-- HMS Holland (I think that this should not activate submarine units as they were only experiments to made an underwater sub)
• Petrol-Electric SS (1905) <-- HMS C1/USS C1/U-1 (Subs would be activated with this tech as they were the first viable subs)
• Viable Diesel-Electric SS (1911) <-- HMS E1/USS H1/U23
• Early GW Diesel-Electric SS (1915) <-- HMS H1/USS N-1/U-93
• Mid GW Diesel-Electric SS (1916) <-- HMS L1/USS O-1/U-151?
• Late GW Diesel-Electric SS (1917) <-- HMS R1/USS S-1
• Post GW Diesel-Electric SS (1921) <-- USS Barracuda
• Interwar Diesel-Electric SS (1925) <-- HMS Oberon/USS Narwhal
• Very Early Diesel-Electric SS (1930) <-- HMS Swordfish/USS Cuttlefish)
• Early Diesel-Electric SS (1933) <-- USS Shark (Porpoise class)/HMS Porpoise (Grampus class)/HMS Seawolf
• Basic Diesel-Electric SS (1935) <-- HMS Sterlet/HMS Triton (T class)/USS Salmon/Type VIIA
• Improved Diesel-Electric SS (1938) <-- Type VIIC/USS Sargo/HMS Tempest (second group of T-Class)
• Developed Diesel-Electric SS (1941) <-- Type VIIC-41/HMS Venturer/USS Drum (Gato class)
• Advanced Diesel-Electric SS (1943) <-- Type XXI/HMS Amphion/USS Amberjack (Tench class)
• Semi Modern Diesel-Electric SS (1944) <-- Type XXIII/USS Devilfish (Balao class)
• Modern Diesel-Electric SS (1948-49) <-- HMS Explorer/USS Barracuda
• Early CW Diesel-Electric SS (1957) <-- HMS Oberon/USS Barbel?/HMS Porpoise (1956)/Type 201
• Basic CW Diesel-Electric SS (1967) <-- Type 205
• Space leaved intentionally in blank
• Early Electric Submarine (1947) <-- USS Tang/Soviet Whiskey class/(seems that RN decided to keep diesel electric propulsion)
• Space leaved intentionally in blank
• First Nuclear Powered SS (1952) <-- USS Nautilus, however i don't think it should be a model of her own, just like the very first sub
• Early CW SSN (1955) <-- USS Skate/USS Skipjack/HMS Dreadnought (S101)/Project 627
• Basic CW SSN (1958) <-- USS Thresher/USS Permit/Project 627A
• Improved CW SSN (1961) <-- USS Sturgeon/Project 645?/HMS Valiant
• Developed CW SSN (1967) <-- Victor I/USS Narwhal (1966)/HMS Churchill
• Advanced CW SSN (1971) <-- USS Los Angeles/HMS Swiftsur/Victor II

[Kretoxian]

Heavy Submarines

• Experimental Aircraft carrying Submarine (1916) <-- The date is just to have those experiments made during ww1, but it should not activate any unit nor give another model because many of them were not viable, like the examples of USS S-1 or HMS M-2 among others.
• Early Submarine Aircraft Carrier (1927) <-- French Surcouf/Ettore Fieramosca/HMS X1
• Basic Submarine Aircraft Carrier (1936) <-- Japanese I-7/I-8
• Improved Submarine Aircraft Carrier (1938) <-- Japanese B1 Type (I-15
• Developed Submarine Aircraft Carrier (1942) <-- Japanese I13 (AM class)/German Type IX D2
• Advanced Submarine Aircraft Carrier (1943) <-- Japanese I-400
• Space leaved intentionally in blank
• Early CW SSBN (1958) <-- USS Theodore Roosevelt (G. Washington class)/HMS Resolution class/Hotel I
• Basic CW SSBN (1961) <-- USS Lafayette/Hotel II class
• Improved CW SSBN (1963) <-- USS Sturgeon/USS Simon Bolivar (Benjamin Franklin class)/Hotel III
• Advanced CW SSBN (1964) <-- Yankee I class/USS Ohio?

I think that SSBN should be part of heavy sub units and not of the regular SS units,for two reasons, the first is that when the developers will make the SS able to carry nuclear weapons, i don't want conventional attack subs to be able to carry nuclear weapons and the second reason is their importance and size and, that's why they should be part of heavy subs and therefore, taken individually.

[Kretoxian]

A small glimpse on how i'm reworking naval TT:

[JRHINDO]

Wow you go back all the way to the 1850s now? Humm, kinda unrelated but now that I think about it a mod gathering all "3 German wars" (1870, 1914, 1939) would be pretty cool.

Now on to the real stuff:
-Could we get some 1860s Ironclads and most importantly Monitors? And on wiki they mention the use of monitors by USA during Vietnam War so could we get a 1960s monitor? (kinda cool really to know that such weird ships survived 100 years of evolution :3)

-Would it be wise to include Commerce/merchant raiders? I remember them from Vicky1 and they were in the 1914 mod i think, and they could be spiritual predecessors of the subs, only unable to submerge and relying on deception to kill. So they could be important anti convoy ships when subs didnt exist/were not very effective. Also I read Q-ships (abit similar in idea) were used as anti sub decoys later, so could be worth investing in them for some specialized roles.

-About Missile ships and ships in general. Were early cold war ships all already really focused on missile warfare? Most of todays ships are equiped with missiles and the surface artillery is almost a backup/support weapon, but did this apply to these early CW ships? Maybe perhaps for the western/Americans, but I think surface armament would still be important for nations like the Soviets and alike who are still abit backward on such technologies for that time. Maybe naval missile artillery could be turned into a naval brigade? Late game replacement for the fire control brigade? To further the idea, fire control brigade could be turned into an armament improvement brigade and reflect the evolution of ship armament. The real fire control thing would be absorbed by a communications and radar brigade, since really those really only do target calculations, relay firing positions, fire adjustments and transmit info to other ships.

-On pocket BB they should be from 1933 to 1939, dates from when Germany re militarized under Hitler. But to me these ships should be put under the BC category, since those are just what they are: Pocket BBs. Really Germany just wanted to troll the British and avoid the restrictions of the limitation treaties. Alternatively if you dont want to make a proper model for them, maybe the P BBs could be just a rename of German BC ship model names of the mentioned era?

-You have added to the lists helicopter cruisers, but no helicopter carriers. Were heli carriers invented later or is this just not written down yet?

Wikipedia made a distinction between cavalry and light tanks, and so did i...

Yeah and thats not the problem, but I meant that Cav and Inf tanks should develop alongside. Cav tanks didnt 'die', research didnt end in a dead end, even tho the concept itself did die. Cav tanks should also be a requisition to research medium tanks and then the MBTs, perfect combination of speed and power (gun and armor wise). And also maybe, infantry tanks should be a way to research the ww2 heavy tanks?

And before I forget, add to the to do, list relating infantry anti tank weapons, some mid war 'recoilless rifle' (like PIAT and minor things), then 'rocket propelled anti-tank weapons' (bazooka) and then late war 'recoilless rocket antitank weapon' (panzerfaust). Post war, there should some minor recoiless anti tank guns techs, but much more focus on man portable modern self propelled grenade techs (rpgs).

[Kretoxian]

Wow you go back all the way to the 1850s now? Humm, kinda unrelated but now that I think about it a mod gathering all "3 German wars" (1870, 1914, 1939) would be pretty cool.

Yep, it would be cool...

Now on to the real stuff:
-Could we get some 1860s Ironclads and most importantly Monitors? And on wiki they mention the use of monitors by USA during Vietnam War so could we get a 1960s monitor? (kinda cool really to know that such weird ships survived 100 years of evolution :3)

>:3 <-- OMG it's a lion!! get in the car!!! Ok, now seriously. Why don't you wait for the tech tree to finish? I'll include monitors, coastal BBs, Frigates, Corvettes and Destroyer escorts, but have patience! BTW, the monitors used by the USA in the 60s, in vietnam, were rivercraft, not seagoing crafts.

-Would it be wise to include Commerce/merchant raiders? I remember them from Vicky1 and they were in the 1914 mod i think, and they could be spiritual predecessors of the subs, only unable to submerge and relying on deception to kill. So they could be important anti convoy ships when subs didnt exist/were not very effective. Also I read Q-ships (abit similar in idea) were used as anti sub decoys later, so could be worth investing in them for some specialized roles.

A convoy raider could be a transport without transportcapability and with convoyattack values... so... maybe yes... while Q-ships could be transports without transportcapability but with a high subdefence values... interesting...

-About Missile ships and ships in general. Were early cold war ships all already really focused on missile warfare? Most of todays ships are equiped with missiles and the surface artillery is almost a backup/support weapon, but did this apply to these early CW ships? Maybe perhaps for the western/Americans, but I think surface armament would still be important for nations like the Soviets and alike who are still abit backward on such technologies for that time. Maybe naval missile artillery could be turned into a naval brigade? Late game replacement for the fire control brigade? To further the idea, fire control brigade could be turned into an armament improvement brigade and reflect the evolution of ship armament. The real fire control thing would be absorbed by a communications and radar brigade, since really those really only do target calculations, relay firing positions, fire adjustments and transmit info to other ships.

There's already a naval missile brigade, but i think that it does not make very much sense so it's a perfect candidate to be removed. Which brigade should they replace? sincerely, i don't know. I'm accepting suggestions. It may not be a bad idea that one posted by you, to have an armament improved brigade... i'll think about it. And, as it is obvious, those missile cruiser ships are ships designed from the very beginning to have missile guns, albeit their names of "missile cruisers".

-On pocket BB they should be from 1933 to 1939, dates from when Germany re militarized under Hitler. But to me these ships should be put under the BC category, since those are just what they are: Pocket BBs. Really Germany just wanted to troll the British and avoid the restrictions of the limitation treaties. Alternatively if you dont want to make a proper model for them, maybe the P BBs could be just a rename of German BC ship model names of the mentioned era?

The first ship considered to be a pocket battleship, was designed and layed down (started to be builded) in 1929 and she was commisioned in 1933, they had a CA/HC hull not a BC one. The Germans tagged them as heavy cruisers, not as BCs. That and their CA hull, i think it's enough reason to put them under CA category. Check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Deutschland

-You have added to the lists helicopter cruisers, but no helicopter carriers. Were heli carriers invented later or is this just not written down yet?

I honestly think that a helicopter cruiser is half a cruiser half a carrier (designed in the late 50s or 60s) while a helo carrier is a CVL with a helicopter brigade (HMS Bulwark, HMS Albion), anyway, as i'm discarding light CAG brigs making it impossible to represent, i think that i may add another class for USS Iwo Jima and USS Tarawa.

Yeah and thats not the problem, but I meant that Cav and Inf tanks should develop alongside. Cav tanks didnt 'die', research didnt end in a dead end, even tho the concept itself did die. Cav tanks should also be a requisition to research medium tanks and then the MBTs, perfect combination of speed and power (gun and armor wise). And also maybe, infantry tanks should be a way to research the ww2 heavy tanks?

But, despite i searched, i couldn't find more cavalry tanks post 1935, it seemed a Franco-Russian idea, that's why i only made two models. About infantry tanks, you have to think that they were used only by UK and those countries following Sandhurst doctrine, that's why, unless you choose that land doctrine path, they are deactivated, (while, if you choose any other path, cavalry tanks are the active ones) and the tank research goes on normally.

And before I forget, add to the to do, list relating infantry anti tank weapons, some mid war 'recoilless rifle' (like PIAT and minor things), then 'rocket propelled anti-tank weapons' (bazooka) and then late war 'recoilless rocket antitank weapon' (panzerfaust). Post war, there should some minor recoiless anti tank guns techs, but much more focus on man portable modern self propelled grenade techs (rpgs).

I'll think about it when i start dealing with infantry techs, not before.

[Kretoxian]

It has been a very busy day, that's why i only found time to "embed" the BCs: