I cannot see the harm in having two classes of pre-dreadnought. However, it would require lots of amendments to our naval OOBs due to the reclassification of pre-dreadnoughts to 'early' and 'late' models - worth doing?
-
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.
Or in other words, "Does anybody volunteer?"Allenby said:
It would mean reading the descriptions of a couple of hundred ships in Conway's to decide which fell into which category, as well as rewriting the tech tree and OOBs. Personally I file this under "nice idea, but there are more important priorities" - but if someone is dedicated and motivated enough to do all the work, go for it...
I'd love to do it, but I don't have access to Conway's, unless it's floating around on the net somewhere.
KingMississippi said:
I possess the relevant copy of Conway's, but I cannot be bothered to undertake the task, as I have more important things to look at.
However, as it is a fundamental change to the workings of the mod, I would not want to leave it until after a number of releases before administering the alterations - I think it's now or never.
Well why don't we add in the two types but just leave all the pre-dreadnaughts as the 'good' type for now and in a later release downgrade as appropriate?
Shadow Knight said:
I think that could work.
As a rough estimate, and for the benefit of the tech tree, I would date 'old pre-Dreadnoughts' at around 1890, and 'new pre-Dreadnoughts' around 1900.
well if someone has the time to look will someone please determine what should be old or new predreadnoughts.
The Industry Tech Tree as of this moment. Still needs work, has no subtechs, tech specialties, difficulties set up yet. If anyone has ideas please feel free to add: There is alot of extra room at the moment so if anyone thinks of what I am missing (and I am sure I am missing something) please do tell.
How about something along the line of 'medicine'? pre-war, early, late, advanced, covering fields such as surgery, penicillin, anticeptics and so forth?
What exactly will be addressed with this? I dont think we need techs for techs so what will be the benefit of researching the med techs.
Oh I wasnt being dismissive or critical just trying to get an idea about what this covers? I always like suggestions so I was just looking for elaboration.
What about agriculture such as in vanilla HOI II? Maybe not as many levels but it would increase manpower rate (maybe at 3% instead of five, but this maybe adjusted for gameplay reasons, etc.).
Medicine could do the same but be a different field, with say a small org bonus in addition to a small manpower rate increase. (Or it could alter first level gives a manpower rate increase, second a org bonus, etc.)
How about these for the Medicine fields:
- Professional Medical Field (All the 1st tier nations would start with this, most 2nd tier, and none of the third-or very few)
- Battlefield Medicine (More than just bandages, amputations, and some whiskey)
- Pharmaceutical Industry (Too bad unlike HOI I we can't link stuff to other categories, in this case the chemical field, but we can just give it a mid-to-late discovery time)
- Advanced Drugs (Late game things like penicillian didn't come till the 30's I believe but there were some advances in decent drugs in the 20's)
Medicine could do the same but be a different field, with say a small org bonus in addition to a small manpower rate increase. (Or it could alter first level gives a manpower rate increase, second a org bonus, etc.)
How about these for the Medicine fields:
- Professional Medical Field (All the 1st tier nations would start with this, most 2nd tier, and none of the third-or very few)
- Battlefield Medicine (More than just bandages, amputations, and some whiskey)
- Pharmaceutical Industry (Too bad unlike HOI I we can't link stuff to other categories, in this case the chemical field, but we can just give it a mid-to-late discovery time)
- Advanced Drugs (Late game things like penicillian didn't come till the 30's I believe but there were some advances in decent drugs in the 20's)
Maybe morale instead of org as knowing you were going to get medical attention and having a better chance of living would always increase any soldiers morale. Or does anyone know if you can affect the "trickle-back" factor for losses. If you could tweak that with techs that is really what the medical fields should change.
Initial look at the aircraft tree.
What do yall think about the pictures? I was actually thinking about going back and wallpapering all of the tech trees with old black and white photos from that time for the tech trees. (about the extent of my graphics skills :rofl: ) Also does anyone have ideas for stats to use for the aircraft, that is the longest part to add up all the various stats and make a WAG about what should go where from TGW.
What do yall think about the pictures? I was actually thinking about going back and wallpapering all of the tech trees with old black and white photos from that time for the tech trees. (about the extent of my graphics skills :rofl: ) Also does anyone have ideas for stats to use for the aircraft, that is the longest part to add up all the various stats and make a WAG about what should go where from TGW.
I don´t like the pictures. I´d say that hey should be removed (alternatively moved to a better location).
Is that better or no pictures entirely. I think if I can figure out how to change the button colors and the text color it would look good.
I'd vote against the pictures too.
A few edits for your initial draft:
Shouldn't 'Close Air Support' be 'Bomber'? and the basic, improved and advanced models should be bomber not recon - recon is only the first level.
I'd suggest 'Airship' instead of 'Zeppelin', only because other countries could develop them too. 'Zeppelin' would be the name of the German models. Also, it's spelled 'primitive'
Finally, you've got the headings for 2-seaters and escorts the wrong way round.
Most of the types should be straight conversions from TGW. The Recon planes (first level of Bomber) should be unarmed, as should the first level of Airship. Airships should have strategic factors, and naval factors at higher levels, and a very high air and ground defence. Is it possible in HoI2 to give a unit a defensive only air attack, so it can shoot back against attacking fighters but not intercept aircraft itself?
CAGs should have air and naval attack factors, and also a low strategic bombing factor (the British used them to strike at German coastal installations).
If we assume normal bombers are balanced in all factors, then strategic bombers would have longer range and higher strat attack, but be more expensive; contour bombers would be cheaper, shorter ranged and have a much higher ground defence factor (they were armoured to ressit ground fire).
Scout fighters are the same as interceptors; two-seaters should have slightly less attack but slightly more defence, and a very small tactical attack factor; escport fighters should be similar in performance to 2-seaters, but much longer ranged and more expensive.
A few edits for your initial draft:
Shouldn't 'Close Air Support' be 'Bomber'? and the basic, improved and advanced models should be bomber not recon - recon is only the first level.
I'd suggest 'Airship' instead of 'Zeppelin', only because other countries could develop them too. 'Zeppelin' would be the name of the German models. Also, it's spelled 'primitive'
Finally, you've got the headings for 2-seaters and escorts the wrong way round.
Most of the types should be straight conversions from TGW. The Recon planes (first level of Bomber) should be unarmed, as should the first level of Airship. Airships should have strategic factors, and naval factors at higher levels, and a very high air and ground defence. Is it possible in HoI2 to give a unit a defensive only air attack, so it can shoot back against attacking fighters but not intercept aircraft itself?
CAGs should have air and naval attack factors, and also a low strategic bombing factor (the British used them to strike at German coastal installations).
If we assume normal bombers are balanced in all factors, then strategic bombers would have longer range and higher strat attack, but be more expensive; contour bombers would be cheaper, shorter ranged and have a much higher ground defence factor (they were armoured to ressit ground fire).
Scout fighters are the same as interceptors; two-seaters should have slightly less attack but slightly more defence, and a very small tactical attack factor; escport fighters should be similar in performance to 2-seaters, but much longer ranged and more expensive.
Fine no more pictures
J/K whatever ... i have no artistic whatsoever
I will correct the misspellings and change to airship and the other mistakes.
J/K whatever ... i have no artistic whatsoever
I will correct the misspellings and change to airship and the other mistakes.