The drama never stops does it! Look I know you said land doctrines was complete but... Can we have a 1975/1980ish tech for proxy warfare/asymmetrical warfare? Seems silly we have techs that go into the 90s but our army stops indoctrination at 1970.
The drama never stops does it! Look I know you said land doctrines was complete but... Can we have a 1975/1980ish tech for proxy warfare/asymmetrical warfare? Seems silly we have techs that go into the 90s but our army stops indoctrination at 1970.
There are no names for units at the American tech tree
Yes, we would like to, but where do we get the space from?
I'm sure you already thought of reorienting the Land Doctrines to the way the other tabs are setup. But if you havent, that might give you some more room. ALso get rid of the damn 19th and 20th century tech that has already been researched even if someone wants to play a WW1 game with your mod. If that's even possible.
If it's not possible to play a WW1 game with your mod, then just remove the land doctrine techs that are before your scenario start date.
Im other words, if your mod scenario start date is 1933, then NO land doctrine techs need to be on that page. That would definitely free up some more space on the land Doctrines page.
Yes, we would like to, but where do we get the space from?
I don't know how hard it would be but, push mass charge and static defence a little higher and that'd create enough room for 2 more techs?
Unwritten rule number 1 that i proposed to myself and was also accepted and seemed nice by both Dannielshannon and Bizon: Do not, never, ever, erase any of the existing vanilla techs as it will create many compatibility issues and will require extra work on scenario adaptation. Work that could be used somewhere else.
Cant a man have a little vacationNot even JRHINDO gave his opinion about this? Me no happy :sad:
Your ideas are fine! I approve! Just something: instead of using tech space couldnt you make a decision event to transition the armies into brigade/squadron/ship?
Also instead of using 10 spy planes for the spying techs, why not covert counter intelligence, numbers radio, sleeper cell, SIGINT, satellite photography, listening satellite, etc?
And the easter egg is cool, but i think cyberspace, or virtual reality would suit better the progression.
Edit: btw I had thought about the whole CLAA/AEGIS thing. Models would be better, because we cant have brigades that exclude other brigades or which are specific to a single model or unit type. If brigades are used then all ships could be turned AA, while having ASW, AA, CIC, armored hull, floatplanes, etc, at the same time. This was not possible due to space, weighting and costs.
Edit 2: Tips for space: remove the category names. We can read tech name cards and tooltips..
Remove the background gfx, and use all the space. Not caring about limits and looks anymore.
Tanker planes should get an alternative req as transport plane, for those who research one and not the other. More realistic too.
Strat bombers should a tech to represent guided, laser guided and JDAM bombs late game, to take over the role of tac bombers, as tacs got taken over by cas and fighters.
Helos should get an alternative req, not everyone research the seaplanes.
Shouldnt CVE get seaplane/helo attachments? I never understood their direct use, if they are so poor on attack.
Wheres the "fixed wing gunship"? Cant find where it is.
What about long range, high speed interceptor crafts? Like the MiG-31.
Could you make the aircraft upgrade system like the ships? So we can have previous generations still available. More realistic.
Space station tech is named lunar landing.
I like the idea of brigade vs. division concentration (less sure of wing vs. squad, that's a smaller numerical difference and the speed difference there, especially, is hard to justify). I'd really want to know if 3 brigades could ever beat one division; if so, why ever use divisions? It would be a complete waste; same investment in IC-days and manpower, faster, and just as powerful. You can do this, but you need to be sure that the brigades don't end up overpowered, and that will require some testing.
# 2 - Modern Infantry Brigade (1945)
model = {
cost = 1.6
buildtime = 97
manpower = 4.3
maxspeed = 18
defaultorganisation = 90
morale = 90
defensiveness = 105
toughness = 120
softness = 95
suppression = 2
airdefence = 42
softattack = 4
hardattack = 2
airattack = 1
transportweight = 3
supplyconsumption = 0.36
fuelconsumption = 0.16
upgrade_time_factor = 0.06
upgrade_cost_factor = 0.25
reinforce_time = 0.15
reinforce_cost = 0.11
equipment = { manpower = 4300 trucks = 245 horses = 1344 artillery = 27 heavy_artillery = 20 anti_tank = 15 anti_air = 5 }
}
# 12 - Modern Infantry Division (1945)
model = {
cost = 5
buildtime = 290
manpower = 13
maxspeed = 6
defaultorganisation = 30
morale = 30
defensiveness = 35
toughness = 40
softness = 95
suppression = 5
airdefence = 14
softattack = 13
hardattack = 5
airattack = 3
transportweight = 10
supplyconsumption = 1.1
fuelconsumption = 0.5
upgrade_time_factor = 0.20
upgrade_cost_factor = 0.75
reinforce_time = 0.45
reinforce_cost = 0.33
equipment = { manpower = 13000 trucks = 736 horses = 4032 artillery = 82 heavy_artillery = 60 anti_tank = 45 anti_air = 15 }
}
As a totally secondary point, have you considered, as part of adding effects to existing technologies, adding cross-branch effects? Specifically, in the US, the Air Force's research into OODA loops (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) is supposed to have had significant positive spillovers for Army and Marine Corps. operations (modeled as, I suppose, morale or organization). Just a thought.
I guess you need to expand the naval tech tree,adding more models of Battleships,why the last model is 1947? hmy:
Does anything do?It's just an easter egg, does it really matter?
I've counted a wooping 89 labels..Nah... it's not like the labels are taking space which could be used for other techs, so i don't think it's a big issue.
CV 1943: 5 max firing distanceThe CVE have their CAG built in organically, except for when you build heavy aviation cruiser which the HAC Cag unit will be unlocked... if you have researched previously 1970 CAG. (i'm changing this in order to make them activated if you have researched multi role fighter only)
Well they'd just skip a generation, its not like they will become ships and NEVER upgrade. And since prod costs would just explode for the very late game models, I think I'd want to keep making older but cheaper and proven models.The problem with that kind of upgrade system is that then not every unit would upgrade automatically, wouldn't it?
I've counted a wooping 89 labels..
Labels do provide visual help. But you already clearly see where are the infantry, cavalry, logistics..But wouldn't it be really... chaotic without labels?