-
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.
GeneralHannibal said:Buts its very frustrating to have it happen once or twice a month.
the first time it happen right click the message than ,mark show in game log only,no more annextion meesage twice a month.
Still playing my US game, having a blast. Few more things:
- Manchuria starts with (or researched) Assymetric Warfare (a land doctrine, name escapes me since I'm at work). It was a '46 or '47 tech, and it was odd to steal its blueprint in '39.
- The Japanese and SU went to war over Khalhin Gol - never saw that. The Soviets are pouring into Manchuria as we speak.
- Question about the cruiser tech - the '38 (?) cruiser unlocks the '41 and the '44 (?) cruisers, which seems odd, because the '44 obsoletes the '41 cruiser - bug?
- Manchuria starts with (or researched) Assymetric Warfare (a land doctrine, name escapes me since I'm at work). It was a '46 or '47 tech, and it was odd to steal its blueprint in '39.
- The Japanese and SU went to war over Khalhin Gol - never saw that. The Soviets are pouring into Manchuria as we speak.
- Question about the cruiser tech - the '38 (?) cruiser unlocks the '41 and the '44 (?) cruisers, which seems odd, because the '44 obsoletes the '41 cruiser - bug?
LM+ said:
Heh, thanks. I tried editing the sleepevents, but that didn't prevent the crash. It looks like something's fouled up in tech then, unless I'm getting a randomly unlucky base DD crash of some sort. I'm also curious, could you elaborate on editing tech a bit?
Encountered a crash bug. US, March '40. Germany declares on Denmark, and the Danes lay down their arms in a day or so. Before that game day ends, the game crashes. Saving immediately after the Danes surrender and reloading at that point seems to avoid the bug - upon reload, the Greenland / Iceland provinces to US event fires w/o incident. I have a save game - LM+, what do you want me to do w/ it?
ZO+ said:
...it better not. I never gave this mod permission to use SMEP's events, only the surrender events. And that was when LM+ said this project would not be in competition with SMEP. Clearly it is indeed competition. However, since I already agreed, I won't be a jerk about it. Still, I feel somewhat deceived.
Last edited:
Atruejedi said:
I don't think LM+ made any claims on this thread that he was going to include any of SMEP's events in future releases; though there has been a request to do so as a suggestion made to LM+ to enhance his mod.
I would be suprised if LM+ does so without your permission; since in post #189 he made it clear that anything brought in from other mods has to be done so as per their usage rules and that proper credit be given if permission is granted.
I hope this is just a misunderstanding; since I believe both of your contributions have enriched the modding community.
Last edited:
Atruejedi said:
is it truly competition when your mod (to my knowledge) is not for DD and this mod is? In any event I enjoyed your mod in the past, and would have used it for DD if it was compatible. thanks for your contributions.
Atruejedi said:
Calm down, I think ZO+ misunderstood something... :wacko:, I hope.
Atruejedi said:
I believe he said something about the Surrender events.. It isn't competition dude.
I think we should forgive Atruejedi as he has had to deal with the pain of the Unofficial SMEP for DD. That was the biggest rip off in history. I'd calm down... Not worth it man. I understand where you are coming from however to work hard on something and then believe it to be ripped off twice. It has happened to me before. I'm sure he was misinformed.
Atruejedi said:
competition,competition??How does that work?Who's winning?Who's Keeping Score? :wacko:
I Know you take pride in your event filled mod,but as long as everone Knows who work it is and is not trying to take credit for anyone elses work,It seems like people praising your work it they would want to include it.But thats just me and nether of these mods are mine,(if refuse to let LM+ or other mods to use your work,will you mind if I merge the two mods togther and play with it,If I don't upload it to be downloaded by all the fans of your work?)
Anastasia said:
Interesting, and here I was thinking that the culprit was in one of the event files. I've played several hands-off campaigns to see if I would experience any of the crashes that has been reported; but for me I was able to play through to 1945 with no major issues. That is why I was thinking that the crashes were related to an event that have yet to fire in any of my test campaigns.
I did notice that there were several AI files missing (SOV_Aggression_Balkans; SOV_Aggression_EasternEurope; and I think a few more) for when the USSR went on the offensive which did cause a few crashes. But once I moved over the "SOV_Aggression" files from DAIM, that problem was solved.
Been away from HoI for a while and this just looks great !
Have downloaded and will start to have a play. If this was truly the most perfect of all possible worlds, Dec would step over from CORE and help out - the naval mod was the best thing that never actually happened.
Maybe have a word with Nighty to find a proper online home for this ? Aragorn is a brilliant guy, but HSR seems to have had a high level evacuation.
Gigz
Have downloaded and will start to have a play. If this was truly the most perfect of all possible worlds, Dec would step over from CORE and help out - the naval mod was the best thing that never actually happened.
Maybe have a word with Nighty to find a proper online home for this ? Aragorn is a brilliant guy, but HSR seems to have had a high level evacuation.
Gigz
To all:
- I owe atruejedi an apology for not being perfectly clear that I do, indeed, only plan to use the surrender events. The reason why Epsilon doesn't currently use any SMEP events at all is because I just haven't had time to test that mod sufficently and be able to give atruejedi some useful feedback.
- If you have a savefile that you believe you can promise me a game crash with, PM me. The crash doesn't have to be on a particular day or even guaranteed. All I ask is that the crash "usually" happen "pretty soon".
Again, if I got the savefile to work once I deleted all those commands, then the next step would be to add them back in until I got a crash, and by this means narrow down the crash-bug(s).
If the game still crashed after I removed all "event = X" commands, then the probable culprit would be tech. In either case, any bug specific to Epsilon can (eventually) be isolated and fixed.
- I owe atruejedi an apology for not being perfectly clear that I do, indeed, only plan to use the surrender events. The reason why Epsilon doesn't currently use any SMEP events at all is because I just haven't had time to test that mod sufficently and be able to give atruejedi some useful feedback.
- If you have a savefile that you believe you can promise me a game crash with, PM me. The crash doesn't have to be on a particular day or even guaranteed. All I ask is that the crash "usually" happen "pretty soon".
I was unclear. Removing the line "sleepevent" won't help. Removing the line AFTER it - all those "event = X" commands - may help.Anastasia said:
Again, if I got the savefile to work once I deleted all those commands, then the next step would be to add them back in until I got a crash, and by this means narrow down the crash-bug(s).
If the game still crashed after I removed all "event = X" commands, then the probable culprit would be tech. In either case, any bug specific to Epsilon can (eventually) be isolated and fixed.
Been playing for two days. Must say - thats the best mod right now and i tried a lot of them. Its just awasome!
A few things i still remember.
JAP AI is building IC from the very beginning! I know that their TC suck but building IC instead of inf as JAP is a suicide. CHI is stoping then too soon and counterattack around late '38. JAP needs to conquer those few IC prov near coast to stop CHI from builind MASS militia army. I just changed the building priorities for JAP to build almost only infantry before marco polo event and then JAP and CHI got really nice, quite historical struggling.
In some games SOV doesn't build IC at all. First years they should build then like mad.
When playing JAP once i got the oil production events and right after them stoping events beause of lack of coal but i had more then 15k.... couldn't find out why its happening.
Second paras tech should have 1940 date. 1941 is too late i think. As GER i would like to use them very effectively when invading NOR, YUG or GRE. I know its better not to use them (cost effective etc.) but the flavor......u know Some famous actions (like ebel amel) where made in 1940.
I think that sending spies and influence should be at last twice as expensive as it it now. Its to easy to get lot of allies and tech from spying.
Difficulty. I was always playing with maluses for me and bonuses only for enemies but....playing on hard as GER makes JAP and ITA very weak (all those -10 IC, res., manpower etc). Personaly i like to see ITA and JAP not being eaten too fast. It should be IMO for example -15 to player instead of -5 to player and -10 for ai or -10 and -5 for ai (on hard). Very hard is a killer for allied ai of human player i guess.
Ok. Thats all i remember right now. Have to play Epsilon, cannot think anymore. Sry for my english.
sth
A few things i still remember.
JAP AI is building IC from the very beginning! I know that their TC suck but building IC instead of inf as JAP is a suicide. CHI is stoping then too soon and counterattack around late '38. JAP needs to conquer those few IC prov near coast to stop CHI from builind MASS militia army. I just changed the building priorities for JAP to build almost only infantry before marco polo event and then JAP and CHI got really nice, quite historical struggling.
In some games SOV doesn't build IC at all. First years they should build then like mad.
When playing JAP once i got the oil production events and right after them stoping events beause of lack of coal but i had more then 15k.... couldn't find out why its happening.
Second paras tech should have 1940 date. 1941 is too late i think. As GER i would like to use them very effectively when invading NOR, YUG or GRE. I know its better not to use them (cost effective etc.) but the flavor......u know
Some famous actions (like ebel amel) where made in 1940.I think that sending spies and influence should be at last twice as expensive as it it now. Its to easy to get lot of allies and tech from spying.
Difficulty. I was always playing with maluses for me and bonuses only for enemies but....playing on hard as GER makes JAP and ITA very weak (all those -10 IC, res., manpower etc). Personaly i like to see ITA and JAP not being eaten too fast. It should be IMO for example -15 to player instead of -5 to player and -10 for ai or -10 and -5 for ai (on hard). Very hard is a killer for allied ai of human player i guess.
Ok. Thats all i remember right now. Have to play Epsilon, cannot think anymore. Sry for my english.
sth
A few more naval suggestions
Canadian and French name suggestions below:
Canada:
Revise as per UK, with following exceptions-
Armored forces changed to Sherman system, as per USA for 1943+
The Canadians switched over in 1943 as the Americans had the better tanks at the time and given how close they were, it just made good sense.
Vickers Valiant- remove from strat bomber list, along with later ones. After the Lancasters, Canada didn't use strategic bombers. Though as a bit of flavor, it's fine.
Catalinas used after 1943.
Keep P-51 and P-40 entries for fighters.
Can't find much for post-war aircraft in this era, Canada wasn't really looking to spend much at this stage.
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equip/historical/hist_e.asp
Canadair F-86 Sabre in as 1951 fighter.
France:
Mogador-class is in the destroyers list twice.
In HSR 2.08, country specific events would fire at the beginning of the game, allowing adjustmest for country specific naval forces. For example, the differences between German and American submarines (range, size and ease of evasion) or German and UK battlecruisers (Uk skimped on armor for speed, Germans skimped on firepower for speed). The second is taken care of through the raiding tech tree (I think- haven't checked the stats), but I thought I would throw it out as an example.
There's still quite a few blanks for names in many areas, mostly due to countries not building ships or aircraft in that area. I wanted to know what you guys thought of using a bit of historical fiction to fill in a few gaps, particularly for the Soviet, German and Japanese navies. Specifically some of the names found at http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/furamain.htm which is a alternative history offshoot of the main site, which is an excellent reference for the Japanese navy.
Maluses... that's a nifty way to put it. Where are you from sth?sth said:
Canadian and French name suggestions below:
Canada:
Revise as per UK, with following exceptions-
Armored forces changed to Sherman system, as per USA for 1943+
The Canadians switched over in 1943 as the Americans had the better tanks at the time and given how close they were, it just made good sense.
Vickers Valiant- remove from strat bomber list, along with later ones. After the Lancasters, Canada didn't use strategic bombers. Though as a bit of flavor, it's fine.
Catalinas used after 1943.
Keep P-51 and P-40 entries for fighters.
Can't find much for post-war aircraft in this era, Canada wasn't really looking to spend much at this stage.
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equip/historical/hist_e.asp
Canadair F-86 Sabre in as 1951 fighter.
France:
Mogador-class is in the destroyers list twice.
In HSR 2.08, country specific events would fire at the beginning of the game, allowing adjustmest for country specific naval forces. For example, the differences between German and American submarines (range, size and ease of evasion) or German and UK battlecruisers (Uk skimped on armor for speed, Germans skimped on firepower for speed). The second is taken care of through the raiding tech tree (I think- haven't checked the stats), but I thought I would throw it out as an example.
There's still quite a few blanks for names in many areas, mostly due to countries not building ships or aircraft in that area. I wanted to know what you guys thought of using a bit of historical fiction to fill in a few gaps, particularly for the Soviet, German and Japanese navies. Specifically some of the names found at http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/furamain.htm which is a alternative history offshoot of the main site, which is an excellent reference for the Japanese navy.
about Mechanised brigade on Motorised unit, are they still consider as soft unit and thus benefit of combined arms bonus while attacking with armor unit ?
thanks
thanks
Enzo said:
Yes, even though there is a large reduction in the "softness" for the Motorised division by the Mechanised brigade; it is still considered a soft unit.
Multiple mods?
Can you download more than one mod in the doomsday directory or do you have to delete the game and reinstall it each time you want to try a new mod? I noticed that doomsday does not allow you to download it in different drives if you have more than one hard drive!
Thanking you in advance.
Can you download more than one mod in the doomsday directory or do you have to delete the game and reinstall it each time you want to try a new mod? I noticed that doomsday does not allow you to download it in different drives if you have more than one hard drive!
Thanking you in advance.
one point on the difference between Art and SP Art : it seems to me that Art is a bit under balanced compare to SP Art, as the SA is more or less the same and SP Art has the important advantage to maintain the unit speed opposed to the Art where you loose one point of speed. So suggestion would be to raise a little more the SA of Art in order to give more interest to this brigade. I know that SP Art is more costly but I'm not sure it's the first criteria to choose what brigade to build. any views on this ?
@amernick : best way is to install dd vanilla once, then copy the full game for each mod you want to install, this way you keep a clean install and can have differents mods into differents directories. I suggest you to rename your copy to something like dd-<mod name> for instance dd-epsilon.
@amernick : best way is to install dd vanilla once, then copy the full game for each mod you want to install, this way you keep a clean install and can have differents mods into differents directories. I suggest you to rename your copy to something like dd-<mod name> for instance dd-epsilon.