• 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.
...and thanks from me too, Uandwhosearmy! :)


Edit:

New version of Corrections uploaded; can be grabbed from the first post in this thread.

The addition is a new beach icon - it has been inspired by Darkest Hour's one, but I did a version of my own which is smaller, more colourful and has no "frame" around.

Here's how it looks:



how about improving the good old beach?
 
how about improving the good old beach?
I take it that you don't like the latest one :D

Jokes apart: which way? I thought about it, but I couldn't find inspiration. Hmm, wait... I could keep the current setup and add a little "sea effect" in front of it... I wonder if it could work.

I'll try and let you know. No news means I hadn't had a very good idea ;)
 
well, i like the vanilla one, actually. just from a practical POV, its sometimes hard to recognize. so if a more eye catching colour for the old beach symbol could be done, this would be great.
but i think there are quite a few people who like the DH thingie, just not me.
 
well, i like the vanilla one, actually. just from a practical POV, its sometimes hard to recognize. so if a more eye catching colour for the old beach symbol could be done, this would be great.
but i think there are quite a few people who like the DH thingie, just not me.
As a matter of fact, I don't dislike the vanilla one either - it's just that, as you say, it is sometimes a bit hard to spot. Another problem is that, to enhance it, I'd have to mod every single beach in the gfx file (there's about 20-25 of them, and all slightly different).

The great advantage of the one in the screenshot above is just that it spared me some time, as I could simply use it for every kind of beach.

Nonetheless, I'll try to look at it again and see the results. If I'll come up with a satisfactory solution, well, you'll see it :) .


EDIT:

New version of Corrections released; it can be downloaded from the 1st post in this thread.

I've slightly tweaked the airmissions and arty bombardment files again (ground targets are light brown instead of green, for example) and I've reworked the trade efficiency bar:





EDIT II:

Made a new icon for German Motorized Infantry, tier II:

 
Last edited:
Good, getting it now.

Edit: Improvement suggestion:

You've made a very nice, coloured "Icon_oil" icon. Why not extending this principle to the remainder of the same icons:

icon_w_aa
icon_w_infrastructure
icon_w_lf
icon_w_partisans
icon_w_radar

Now they are all white and I'm sure they can be colourified :D


You can also improve battle event pictures that you borrowed from some other mod. Having a German soldier on the pic that indicates ambush event is not nice when playing anything else besides, well Germany ;) Icons indicating the type of event are also not big enough and don't tell much at a first glance. Thus I propose that you instead get rid of the real photos included in those pics as a background and make a simple mono-coloured background with a big icon indicating what event we talk about. Let's take a look how the ambush event would look liek following my suggestion (I know I suck but you'll get the idea how it shall look like):



There need to be pics made for these events:

ambush
assault
breakthrough
counterattack
delay
encirclement
withdrawal
noimage (what does this serve for?)
 
Last edited:
Edit: Improvement suggestion:

You've made a very nice, coloured "Icon_oil" icon. Why not extending this principle to the remainder of the same icons:

icon_w_aa
icon_w_infrastructure
icon_w_lf
icon_w_partisans
icon_w_radar

Now they are all white and I'm sure they can be colourified :D
Yes, they can be colored indeed. :)

The fact, though, is that I rather like them as they are, i.e. white, given the role they have in the interface screen (I see them as "neutral" and also think that white sticks out immediately).

Nonetheless, this will be a job for the next weekend; I'll give them a look and see how can they be improved. ;)


You can also improve battle event pictures that you borrowed from some other mod. Having a German soldier on the pic that indicates ambush event is not nice when playing anything else besides, well Germany. Icons indicating the type of event are also not big enough and don't tell much at a first glance. Thus I propose that you instead get rid of the real photos included in those pics as a background and make a simple mono-coloured background with a big icon indicating what event we talk about. Let's take a look how the ambush event would look liek following my suggestion (I know I suck but you'll get the idea how it shall look like):



There need to be pics made for these events:

(list)[/QUOTE]
Heh, I know, battle event pictures are something I've never touched since I've published the TP. Even this idea is interesting - give me some time to try to translate it into actual gxf...
 
I have been trying this mod along with SKIF graphics mod and have found a few problems with the compatibility.

It seems that the Tripartite mod has included with it a redundant models.csv file that changes the names of seversal units - the ones I have noticed are the Desert Fox Hurricane interceptors being replaced with Spitfires, and German 1944 FW190s being changed to ME109s for some reason. Anyway it radically affects the realsim of the game in my opinion. I would imagine the Hurricanes are correct for this time period as I rmember seeing them have aboukir filters fitted for use in deserts whereas desert spit mark 5s came along later. I cant imagine Germany used ME109s much in 1944 either compare to its much better FW190s.

It also messes up all the unit b&w photo pictures as well it seems. So I have removed this CSV file from my Tripartite mod and the mod seems to now work well with SKIF and the revised coloured unit pictures that SKIF includes. I dont know why all these names have been changed but I dont think the Spit was ever classed as an bomber interceptor - this was always the job of the Hurricanes. The CSv file doesnt seem relevant to AoD now anyway so it is relatively safe to remove as far as I know.

Just thought you would want to know. I havent looked into this matter fully yet so it could be only those two instances that were changed and the rest of the countries are fine. I only really notice England and Germany I dont know much about anyone elses planes.
 
Titan79 maybe you could make pictures for the straits of Gibraltar, Marmara, Suez channel and panama channel.
 
Ok, let's analyze your remarks and complaints in detail, Nats.

I have been trying this mod along with SKIF graphics mod and have found a few problems with the compatibility.
First off, it's rather clear that if you use two different mods you'll find some differencies between them, i.e. the first mod will have its features while the second will have its own. The problem is, rather, historical plausibility. Let's see it:

It seems that the Tripartite mod has included with it a redundant models.csv file that changes the names of seversal units - the ones I have noticed are the Desert Fox Hurricane interceptors being replaced with Spitfires, and German 1944 FW190s being changed to ME109s for some reason. Anyway it radically affects the realsim of the game in my opinion. I would imagine the Hurricanes are correct for this time period as I rmember seeing them have aboukir filters fitted for use in deserts whereas desert spit mark 5s came along later. I cant imagine Germany used ME109s much in 1944 either compare to its much better FW190s.
I'll quote myself from another thread, where you wrote almost the same thing:
Sorry to contradict you, but I did that on purpose.

In vanilla AoD, Eng interceptors are the Hurricane, Tempest and Typhoon, while Spitfires are regarded as multi-role fighters. Now, if we bear in mind that multi-role fighters, in RL as well as in game, were/are much more suited for ground attack missions (i.e. carrying bombs and rockets) then the Tempest and Typhoon make much more sense; considering them interceptors (i.e., more than the Spitfire) is wrong, IMO.

So, it's the Tripartite Pack airplanes which are correctly identified, not SKIF's.
The fact that you saw Hurricanes in Africa means little to nothing: the game, unfortunately, has only a limited number of aircraft models represented for each country and there is a choice to be done. As written above, though, Tempests and Typhoons aren't surely to be considered bomber interceptors more than Spitfires were - hence my moving them to the Fighters cathegory while making Spitfires the "primary" Interceptors.

About the Fw190/Bf 109 issue: just as NiL_FisK|Urd wrote, Bf 109 has been in production until the very end of the war with its final version, the Bf 109K (Kurfürst), being an exceptional airplane (just think that its rate of climb was superior to all Allied adversaries including the P-51D Mustang, Spitfire Mk.XIV and Hawker Tempest Mk.V). Again, as for the Spifires, the matter is the same: the Bf 109K fits better in the Int cathegory. In any case, Germany's Fig III in the Tripartite Pack is the Fw190D, so in 1944 you'll see both Messerschmitts and Focke-Wulfs roaring over Europe.

(Later edit: I've checked the list of aircraft I've changed from vanilla and, while British fighters and interceptors are partially swapped, I've made no changes to the first tiers of German int/fig. So I don't know where you got the impression that I changed Germany's 1944 aircraft from).

It also messes up all the unit b&w photo pictures as well it seems. So I have removed this CSV file from my Tripartite mod and the mod seems to now work well with SKIF and the revised coloured unit pictures that SKIF includes. I dont know why all these names have been changed but I dont think the Spit was ever classed as an bomber interceptor - this was always the job of the Hurricanes. The CSv file doesnt seem relevant to AoD now anyway so it is relatively safe to remove as far as I know.
:D It doesn't "mess up" anything, on the contrary: I've matched all the model names I've changed with the corresponding pictures, so this must be a result of your overwriting one mod with the other. As for the Spitfire "not ever being classed as a bomber interceptor":
Wiki said:
The Spitfire was designed as a short-range, high-performance interceptor aircraft by R. J. Mitchell, chief designer at Supermarine Aviation Works (which operated as a subsidiary of Vickers-Armstrong since 1928). The Spitfire's elliptical wing had a thin cross-section, allowing a higher top speed than several contemporary fighters, including the Hawker Hurricane. Speed was seen as essential to carry out the mission of home defence against enemy bombers.
In addition: have you ever noticed that the perfectly matching SKIF icons do display Stukas as biplanes...? ;)

Just thought you would want to know. I havent looked into this matter fully yet so it could be only those two instances that were changed and the rest of the countries are fine. I only really notice England and Germany I dont know much about anyone elses planes.
Thank you for your remarks! I already knew this, however. I spent much time on this mod and, while there can be (and surely are) some inconsistencies (although, apart from graphics and audio, those few airplanes are almost the only thing I've changed from vanilla AoD), the Fig/Int issue is not one of them, at least when keeping in mind that one has to deal with the limited choices the game offers. I hope you'll be able to appreciate all the other features contained in my mod, apart from airplanes which you obviously don't like :p ;)

Titan79 maybe you could make pictures for the straits of Gibraltar, Marmara, Suez channel and panama channel.
Sure - send me some good pictures, or links to them, and I'll do it!
 
Last edited:
I have been trying this mod along with SKIF graphics mod and have found a few problems with the compatibility.

It seems that the Tripartite mod has included with it a redundant models.csv file that changes the names of seversal units - the ones I have noticed are the Desert Fox Hurricane interceptors being replaced with Spitfires, and German 1944 FW190s being changed to ME109s for some reason. Anyway it radically affects the realsim of the game in my opinion. I would imagine the Hurricanes are correct for this time period as I rmember seeing them have aboukir filters fitted for use in deserts whereas desert spit mark 5s came along later. I cant imagine Germany used ME109s much in 1944 either compare to its much better FW190s.

It also messes up all the unit b&w photo pictures as well it seems. So I have removed this CSV file from my Tripartite mod and the mod seems to now work well with SKIF and the revised coloured unit pictures that SKIF includes. I dont know why all these names have been changed but I dont think the Spit was ever classed as an bomber interceptor - this was always the job of the Hurricanes. The CSv file doesnt seem relevant to AoD now anyway so it is relatively safe to remove as far as I know.

Just thought you would want to know. I havent looked into this matter fully yet so it could be only those two instances that were changed and the rest of the countries are fine. I only really notice England and Germany I dont know much about anyone elses planes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_109#Production
you seem to have a fundamental lack of knowledge at least when it comes to aircrafts of ww2, the german bf/me 109 was used from 37 until the very last day of the war in 45, primarily as an interceptor and air superiority fighter, the later versions showed many signs of lagging behind the allies but where still very capable of engaging the allied and soviet fighters in 1-1 dogfights and many 100+ aces flew the 109 exclusively thought the war.

the spitfire and hurricanes where both designed as interceptor/air superiority fighters, in which they both excelled an where almost equal to the bf 109 D/E's, the hurrican where shifted to the ground attack roles after the battle of britain, mainly because they where so slow, they where suited to carry cannons and there where a lot of hurricanes in flying condition... the midditerran theather was also very suited to the hurricane as the italian air force where still operating bi-plane and equally slow monoplane fighters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire
the spitfire was classed as an interceptor/air superiority fighter, the primary reason why the hurricane was still used in the BOB was due to the lack of spitfire airframes not because the hurricane was a superior bomber interceptor, the spitfire where capable of intercepting faster and to higher altitudes than the hurricane and with equal armaments, the later spitfires where fitted with even more deadly cannon armaments which proved to be able to tear appart any axis bomber quickly.

any more questions nats?

titan, the early 37 german model 0 CAS could be substituted with the Henschel Hs 123 biplane as it was used in CAS role to '44 from 36 and the CAS model 2 with the Henschel Hs 129 which came into service in 42-43 even though only 871 where produced in total compared to the stuka's 5700+

http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/2-Airplanes/Axis/1-Germany/03-AttackPlanes/Hs-123/Hs-123A1.htm
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/2-Airplanes/Axis/1-Germany/03-AttackPlanes/Hs-129/Hs-129A-0.htm
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your support, PB-DK. As for your suggestion:

titan, the early 37 german model 0 CAS could be substituted with the Henschel Hs 123 biplane as it was used in CAS role to '44 from 36 and the CAS model 2 with the Henschel Hs 129 which came into service in 42-43 even though only 871 where produced in total compared to the stuka's 5700+
Yes, they could - but, as you say, the Hs 129 has been built in very limited numbers; and the Hs 123 would be very strange to see on the battlefield in 1939 or even 1940/'41 (in my current game I've still got some tier I CAS in mid-1941, and I much prefer to see the early Stuka rather than a biplane).

However, it's primarily a matter of flavour and immersion. I simply like the Stuka better as I think it perfectly represents the CAS cathegory for Germany, but it would be possible to use even other models, yes.


Edit:

@ Hister, I think a possible way to represent "neutral" battle events as you asked could be using e.g. details taken from war maps, with encirclement being the most obvious (and easy to find). As for the others, we'd have to search for adequate ones.

Would you care to gather some of them? Then I could try to turn them into battle events pictures.

As for your other suggestion:

Improvement suggestion:

You've made a very nice, coloured "Icon_oil" icon. Why not extending this principle to the remainder of the same icons:

icon_w_aa
icon_w_infrastructure
icon_w_lf
icon_w_partisans
icon_w_radar

Now they are all white and I'm sure they can be colourified
Well, first off, the oil icon has been made in color since so look all other resources icons. The provincial structures' icons are another kettle of fish since they have always been all white, and this is the reason I left them so :) .

Anyway, this doesn't necessarily mean that we have to leave them as they are now; so, I've tried to colour some of them but the results weren't much encouraging. From the screenshot below you can clearly see why the original color, i.e. white, is the best for them:



The land fort symbol does look like a flying saucer :D and, more importantly, it's rather hard to see it on gray background... Moreover, if I'd even make the icons darker to offset the background, I'd have to take into account that in some cases there would be another type of background (look, for example, at the port or at the sea fort icon), thus making it very difficult to see them sometimes. I'd rather leave them as they are now...
 
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_109#Production
you seem to have a fundamental lack of knowledge at least when it comes to aircrafts of ww2, the german bf/me 109 was used from 37 until the very last day of the war in 45, primarily as an interceptor and air superiority fighter, the later versions showed many signs of lagging behind the allies but where still very capable of engaging the allied and soviet fighters in 1-1 dogfights and many 100+ aces flew the 109 exclusively thought the war.

the spitfire and hurricanes where both designed as interceptor/air superiority fighters, in which they both excelled an where almost equal to the bf 109 D/E's, the hurrican where shifted to the ground attack roles after the battle of britain, mainly because they where so slow, they where suited to carry cannons and there where a lot of hurricanes in flying condition... the midditerran theather was also very suited to the hurricane as the italian air force where still operating bi-plane and equally slow monoplane fighters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire
the spitfire was classed as an interceptor/air superiority fighter, the primary reason why the hurricane was still used in the BOB was due to the lack of spitfire airframes not because the hurricane was a superior bomber interceptor, the spitfire where capable of intercepting faster and to higher altitudes than the hurricane and with equal armaments, the later spitfires where fitted with even more deadly cannon armaments which proved to be able to tear appart any axis bomber quickly.

any more questions nats?

Thank you for the information very interesting.

All my very quick comments were based on seeing the affect of the Tripartite mod on two planes in two scenarios. Also it appeared that it made use of the SKIF and other mods that rely on default ordering of units difficult, without significant modification, due to the alteration of the units in the Tripartite mod. That was my only real point so that anyone who employs the Tripartite mod is aware of the issues it will bring. And that fact that these synchronisation issues can all be nullified by removing the models.csv file in the Tripartite mod.

If you like it the way it is thats fine, no probs.

Job done, cheers.
 
All my very quick comments were based on seeing the affect of the Tripartite mod on two planes in two scenarios. Also it appeared that it made use of the SKIF and other mods that rely on default ordering of units difficult, without significant modification, due to the alteration of the units in the Tripartite mod. That was my only real point so that anyone who employs the Tripartite mod is aware of the issues it will bring. And that fact that these synchronisation issues can all be nullified by removing the models.csv file in the Tripartite mod.

If you like it the way it is thats fine, no probs.

Job done, cheers.
Sorry, Nats, but this remark is rather pointless as every mod does change something - this is why it's called "modification".

It seems to me like you're saying that one should be warned that, if he uses SKIF, then applies the Tripartite Pack and then reverts back again to SKIF (which is what you seem to have done, as far as I get it), he will have some aircraft model names not matching with SKIF icons. Well, apart from the rather awkward path needed to achieve this effect, this is obvious. If the two mods were 1:1, mine would simply be called SKIF and not Tripartite Pack; but it is not so and thus it changes something in regard to vanilla and, in our case, to SKIF.

It is a wise rule everyone should always follow to make a backup of the game's files - or use programs like JSGME - before applying any mod, in order to be able to quickly revert to the previous setup, if he does not like the new changes the mod introduced. The way you put it makes it appear like the TP is somehow "bugged" because it changes some vanilla aircraft models while, as written above by me, PB-DK and NiL_FisK|Urd, as a matter of fact it corrects some inconsistencies from the vanilla version, while SKIF, in my opinion, does not.

At the end of the day, though, it's mainly a matter of taste. I think that Tempests and Typhoons could never be considered interceptors, especially if the alternative are Spitfires; but everyone is free to see it as he wishes. Surely it's not a "flaw", though, to change the models.csv to reflect the change I've made to amend vanilla's basically wrong models.
 
Last edited:
@ Hister, I think a possible way to represent "neutral" battle events as you asked could be using e.g. details taken from war maps, with encirclement being the most obvious (and easy to find). As for the others, we'd have to search for adequate ones.

Would you care to gather some of them? Then I could try to turn them into battle events pictures.
Already tried finding something suitable via google pics but to no avail so far ;)


I'd rather leave them as they are now...
OK.
 
Already tried finding something suitable via google pics but to no avail so far
Wait, I was referring to WW2 battle maps - you just need to type "Kharkov", "Kursk" etc. to see them, be the source Wiki or else.

Then, check if the arrows which show armies' movements do resemble e.g. an encirclement, a counterattack etc. When you find something which you consider suitable, you can send it to me :) (here's an example of what I mean).
 
OK, so I just started a beta game of CORE 0.60 and after the initial confusion goes away I think I will love the mod! But, I sorely miss your graphics Titan... The vanilla unit graphics don't really do it for me. I know this is a question which has been raised previously, but is there a way of porting your mod to CORE? I read in the CORE mod description that you guys have already worked together?
 
I have a big chunk of his mod ported over just without his nice model icons which admittedly makes for the biggest part of his mod. It would be an immense work needed for him to port over all his model icons to CORE but if the demand will be high he might just do so right Titan? ;)

Download his mod somewhere separately, unzip it and copy-paste all the files that you want to see in CORE.

BUT DON'T copy the following folders/files:

config folder
db folder
models folder
all the province photos (Ill_prov_x) - well you can use them but Hagar does already have them in his Travel Pack for Core - in case you haven't used it do so.

That's it - easy isn't it!?