I have taken England and Wales, and London and Bombay. something like 50VPs. Spain took Gibraltar, Italy North Africa, Persian and Japan did a nice little pincers on British India, as well as Singapore. Is surrender based on territory taken, or VPs?
-
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.
I have taken England and Wales, and London and Bombay. something like 50VPs. Spain took Gibraltar, Italy North Africa, Persian and Japan did a nice little pincers on British India, as well as Singapore. Is surrender based on territory taken, or VPs?
You will just loose your org. May be attrition will increase, but you can also not reinforce them to save MP. Where will not be any dissident.
(1) is correct. There is no way a tech is applied to a unit after it has been put in the queue. Even when it is the second, third or any further of a serial build, the tech is applied that was in effect when the serial build had been started.
Holy crap! Are you sure about the last part? I did not understand that. In fact, as they build up, I do notice the IC costs and build times go down. I always assumed the decrease in cost/time was the result of a mixture of (1) the practical I get from building the unit and (2) the theoretical I get from related research.
So if I build 1x3 carriers, where the 3 are the serial - not parallel - build, NONE of the tech that I develop IN 55 MONTHS would be applied to the carriers in queue? Really, that's an annoying bad game design paradigm.
Which leads to the next quick question: if the above is true, then exactly why would I ever logically use a serial build?
From an in-game logic perspective, a new engine (or armor or what have you) would require a substantially different design in plans. It isn't as though you can just plop an engine into any old hull and call it a carrier. You can't fault your shipwrights for not being mind readers. (Well you can, but it isn't smart.)
Some techs do change; AA is the biggest example (but must be upgraded), and your doctrines take effect immediately (as far as I know).
For big ships? Serial builds are a waste of time, as you surmised. It's better to plan your constructions around your techs, even delay them if something neat is coming up in the pipeline fairly soon.
Thanks, and I do understand, from a parallel perspective. I'd be committed to that build and changing things "midstream" would only cause problems. But serial? That means if, while building a carrier or battleship, I learn something new, I won't apply it to a ship I haven't even started yet? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Even with land units (I'm thinking artillery here) you wouldn't want to use the serial build if you had any tech being developed at all. If you did, then you end up with this:
Unit cost + upgrade cost
when you could just have this:
Unit cost.
Unless I'm still misunderstanding something . . .
The idea is that you'd have to draw up entirely new plans. Putting new guns on a battleships is very different than giving a soldier a new rifle.
Serial build is, IMHO, best used for things that don't cost much, are unlikely to change, or where quantity is more important than quality. Transports and IC are two examples of stuff you might build serially.
For small stuff, like artillery brigades in your example, yes, you do have unit cost + upgrade cost, but upgrades are cheap, and you can probably build more than one artillery brigades, even in serial, before your next tech is finished.
I've never liked how serial items don't get the better techs, but once you know about it, it's not a big deal. You just plan accordingly.
And, as someone pointed out, it's mostly a problem for big ticket items anyway. And those are the ones you want to micromanage in your queue anyway. I'm not building CVs as throw away ships, you know.
And, as someone pointed out, it's mostly a problem for big ticket items anyway. And those are the ones you want to micromanage in your queue anyway. I'm not building CVs as throw away ships, you know.
Anyone know how long truces last? (In MP game as Romania and just switched to Comintern puppet. Now I've been sitting around for a month doing nothing because I'm truced with Axis.)
The only sensible use of a serial build is for units that take much less time than the research cycle. In other words: having researched e.g. '38 Art tech in May '38, you can savely start a serial build of artillery with a total length of 20 months or so.
I was thinking about fonts for making pictures ... which font is the faux cyrillic one? i didin't saw it with the .tga files , but some just appear blank white or blank black.
So I'm playing as Sweden and I have annexed Norway, it's 1937 and now I have declared war against Denmark.
I'm trying to invade Denmark from Oslo and land my troops in Fredrikshavn. But when I select my transport boats and select the "Invasion" option, my boats just sit in Oslo being useless. I have my fleet positioned in Kattegat in order to keep my transports safe. But nobody does anything.
And when I attack from Malmö into Köpenhamn, I get a million different penalties stacked against me so that option is useless for now.
So why aren't my transport boats moving? Even if I select a place in Denmark without a harbour, they still won't move!
I'm trying to invade Denmark from Oslo and land my troops in Fredrikshavn. But when I select my transport boats and select the "Invasion" option, my boats just sit in Oslo being useless. I have my fleet positioned in Kattegat in order to keep my transports safe. But nobody does anything.
And when I attack from Malmö into Köpenhamn, I get a million different penalties stacked against me so that option is useless for now.
So why aren't my transport boats moving? Even if I select a place in Denmark without a harbour, they still won't move!
Is there some secret to making Destroyers find subs? I'm playing as Japan (in SF 2.04f) and have a British sub squadron (2 units) raiding my convoys along the southern coast of China. I have 5 ASW squadrons of 2 destroyers each following him from province to province but they have not engaged him once, even when they were all in the same province with the subs. They are all set to AGGRESSIVE stance with Priority 4.
It sounds like you are using manual control and the patrol mission. Patrol missions are too random. You need a combination of patrol and intercept missions. Also, if you can spare them, create an ASW TF of 2CVL/2CL/3DD and manually control it to hunt those subs down. If possible set most of the ASW forces to AI control while you control the ASW TF to augment it.
You can also pay attention to where the subs are going (their next province) and have three or four destroyers waiting for them (the move mission). Also, center your patrol areas around the subs' last known sighting. This unfortunately requires extreme micromanagement, which makes AI control the better option. Be patient...if you give the AI the right forces it will nail those subs.
EDIT: If you don't have your ASW techs up to date it will be real hard to get those subs. I forgot to add: use commanders with the spotter trait.
Thanks for the quick reply. I was using manual control with the Move command with ALL of my destroyer ASW forces in the same province as the subs. When it moved, I moved my ASWs, too. I did this from province to province for 9 moves, but NEVER got an engagement with them. I mean, 10 destroyer squadrons over the subs for 9 moves, but NO engagement . . . even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally. I've also had my naval bombers attacking it, to no avail. BTW, I can't spare any carrier forces for this due to battles elsewhere.
Thanks for the quick reply. I was using manual control with the Move command with ALL of my destroyer ASW forces in the same province as the subs. When it moved, I moved my ASWs, too. I did this from province to province for 9 moves, but NEVER got an engagement with them. I mean, 10 destroyer squadrons over the subs for 9 moves, but NO engagement . . . even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally. I've also had my naval bombers attacking it, to no avail. BTW, I can't spare any carrier forces for this due to battles elsewhere.
OK, now I'm really confused. I just got a message notification that my forces had discovered an enemy fleet. When I investigated (using debug FOW) I discovered that it is another sub unit. Still no engagement. How can the destroyers notify me they've found an enemy sub and not engage it?