Research Realism?

[spannbeton]

Is it possible to lower the research dates for specific countries? Or if not just edit the "before" historical date penalty for this country?

I always find it quite annoying when UK or USA have the torbojets or stratetic-rockets etc at the same time as germany. As they where clearly lagging behind in those techs.

[TanKoL]

well .... if i'm not mistaken, the first pratical and efficient turbojet plane was a British Gloster, but they decided against changing the whole chains of production in order to continue churning out a lot of "regular" but still pretty good aircraft instead of losing some serious output for a long time (they didn't research seriously into strategic rockets though)

[markslawson]

The British did get jets around about the same time as Germany .. the UK inventor (Frank Whittle..) and the Germany inventor (whose name escapes me) subsequently agreed to share credit.. however, Germany went ahead with gettijng a version into combat as it was desperate.. but my recollection is that it ate up so much fuel that the gamble didn't work..

But I dunno how to edit the files to change the research date..

[Faulty]

Is it possible to lower the research dates for specific countries? Or if not just edit the "before" historical date penalty for this country?

I always find it quite annoying when UK or USA have the torbojets or stratetic-rockets etc at the same time as germany. As they where clearly lagging behind in those techs.

Difference in nations' progress is reflected by the player choosing to research them earlier

[spannbeton]

Well some things are right, britain had turbojet engines but werent as advanced in avionics as germany. They simply couldnt have built turbojet fíghters which would have been a lot better than the normal ones. On the other hand germans already had some experience with high speed planes as they had rocket planes as well.

There was an american airforce general who was saying about german jet and rocket aircraft armed with air to air missiles that if they would be able to deploy them in a serious number they would be forced to stop the strategic bombing campaign. So they worked pretty well.

Sure i could simply research them earlier but this gives me serious mali while the ai researches it as well. not really what i was up to.

[Cardus]

Well some things are right, britain had turbojet engines but werent as advanced in avionics as germany. They simply couldnt have built turbojet fíghters which would have been a lot better than the normal ones. On the other hand germans already had some experience with high speed planes as they had rocket planes as well.

There was an american airforce general who was saying about german jet and rocket aircraft armed with air to air missiles that if they would be able to deploy them in a serious number they would be forced to stop the strategic bombing campaign. So they worked pretty well.

Sure i could simply research them earlier but this gives me serious mali while the ai researches it as well. not really what i was up to.

The difference should be made by skill level and "specialties" of the tech teams. What you can do if you are not happy is to change those by yourself

[spannbeton]

So it is not possible to edit what I mentioned first?
Well editing tech teams is a bad idea as it might then give you an advantage in other technologies as well.

If possible id just like to reduce the historical data of turbojets and rockets for germany just to make sure they have them first.

Just some historical flavour though.

[Gort11]

I don't believe you can change the technology tree for a single nation - if you changed it it would change for everyone.

What you could do is start Germany with the blueprints for the techs in question.

I notice in 1.03 that Germany will have events that might give them free rocket sites at Peenemunde, though, so you might just want to wait for the patch.

[vcgetdown]

AIs, in my experience, tend to love to research techs with blueprints first, so maybe giving them the blueprints would be the solution you are looking for?

[spannbeton]

Yeah blueprints might work, still it would be a huge penalty to research them early, right?
Maybe even editing allied rocketry teams to have lower skills?

Where can i do this?

@Gort11

Well the patch is outta Question.
Still i think the game is a bit unbalanced and i hope some things to be changed with 1.03 but i guess not.
Loved No Mercy (AOD MOD) though which had some differences between nations such as better, but more costly tanks for germany whereas the usa had cheap but crap sherman tanks.

Kind of like the Infantry focus DH has, as any army mostly consists of infantry but still tanks are quite useless in battle in DH 1.02 at least (which is everything i can talk about, so devs dont bother about telling me everything will be fixed in a patch that comes out in 2015). Historically German tanks werent better than the allied and soviet ones but the doctrines. So this might be the way.
Im not very good at modding, dont want to make my game easier at all but want some historical feeling. And for me it is crucial that Tanks are the main projection of power on a battlefield.
Maybe lowering hard attack of land units to nearly nothing will do the trick? Means that Infantry will only be able to crush Tanks when equipped with proper AT or air power?

If there is any mod out there which already represents all of those issues i'd be very glad to hear about it.

[Cardus]

not really. if you add rocketry to USA/ENG tech teams late in the 1950s it should be fine and historically consistent.

[spannbeton]

Wouldnt be consistent if axis had won the war though.

Would have been a nightmare for the allies if the war has started 3 or even 4 years later.
ICBM's raining down on New York and Washington once America enters the war, stuff like that.
Battle of England would have been totally different with german Turbojet Bombers being faster than RAF Interceptors...

(For that, is there any modeling for faster planes having a combat multiplier over slower ones?)

Just think the game models it a bit but not as much as would be historically consistent. In some key technologies german economy was decades in advance, they just didnt have the resources to put all of this into work.

[Gort11]

Kind of like the Infantry focus DH has, as any army mostly consists of infantry but still tanks are quite useless in battle in DH 1.02 at least

Well, it's easily fixed if you know what you actually want. Answer this question:

How much soft attack (for killing infantry) should a tank division have compared to an infantry division? In the game at the moment they're roughly equally good at it. (though the tanks will take fewer losses due to hardness)

Infantry costs 1450 IC-days to make. The first medium armour (1939) costs 8280. (5.7 times as much)

So if you wanted to, you could raise the soft attack of a tank division by a factor of 5.7. This would give you 1939 tank divisions with 91 soft attack, which I think you'll agree would be a heck of a good division.

Of course, you could argue that the speed of tanks - along with their hardness which gives them lower losses than infantry - are also assets which must factor into the cost, so you could compare tanks to cavalry of a similar speed. 1939 tanks go at 10, so we'll compare them to 1939 cavalry (which goes at 8 admittedly, but it's as close as it gets).

Cost for cost, you'd get 50 soft attack by using cavalry instead of tanks, which seems reasonable.

So, if you want to make tanks better, go into your C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\darkest hour a hoi game\Mods\Darkest Hour Full\db\units\divisions folder and open the "armor.txt" file. Add 34 to the soft attack of every tank division model.

Then, open the "light_armor.txt" file and add 34 to the soft attack of the tank divisions in there.

Presto, mega-powerful tank divisions that every nation will want, and they're sorta-kinda economical to use in battle as well.

[spannbeton]

Deleted

[Xoden]

Looks like you are too emotionally invested in the game. Calm down a bit.

[spannbeton]

Someone posted advertising, that was why.