HoI4 DevDiary - Tank Designer

[xtfoster]

Sorry your right misread something in a book I was reading. Think it was an earlier design by Christie I was thinking of that a bit of a meme.

Just looked it up it was the the T series of Combat Cars got the M1 mixed up with the T1 changed the post up above.

You are probably thinking of the T3 Convertible Medium Tank, which was designed to run on rubber wheels while on the road. Although to call the T's a series is misleading. The T's were simply placeholder names given while the design was in Trials and if accepted would have been changed for the final Model name once production was ordered.

 

[Lord_Boreas]

You are probably thinking of the T3 Convertible Medium Tank, which was designed to run on rubber wheels while on the road. Although to call the T's a series is misleading. The T's were simply placeholder names given while the design was in Trials and if accepted would have been changed for the final Model name once production was ordered.

I called it a series because there is several tanks using that designation going all the way from the T1 (The cavalry version of the T3 with a 50cal mg rather than a tank gun) up to the T7 which was cancelled in 39 which all had the hairbrained idea of having to able to run on wheels and tracks. This wasn't a one off with a few variants.

Given that paradox has added Christie Suspension I wouldn't be surprised if they had one or two of the early T series (T1 and or T3) with the interwar chassis marked down as medium tanks for America in 1936. Those two tanks did lead to all cruiser and BT tanks somehow afterall even with the weirdness we are talking about here ala convertible medium and light tanks.

 

[Nikolai II]

I called it a series because there is several tanks using that designation going all the way from the T1 (The cavalry version of the T3 with a 50cal mg rather than a tank gun) up to the T7 which was cancelled in 39 which all had the hairbrained idea of having to able to run on wheels and tracks. This wasn't a one off with a few variants.

There weren't all that harebrained when they were worked upon. In the late twenties and early thirties tracks wore out so quickly that all kinds of methods were used to get greater mobility with less wear and tear (and lots of tanks were very light). But as track quality improved wheels could be skipped, mostly since this also allowed tanks to be heavier.

 

[KosmicKat]

I haven't looked through this thread to see if anyone else brought it up, but I wonder if the paradox HOI4 team would consider adding an "APC" option for tanks that would allow a tank to be turned into a apc like the canadian Kangaroo personnel carrier. I think this would be an interesting thing but I don't know how much they want to expand upon new battalions that would be included in the division designer.

 

[homerCCCP]

I thought wargames were instituted to confirm the prejudices of real-world generals until some genius came along and blew a cold wind up their skirts.

But I've never assumed that what happened historically was the "optimal" choice. I just like to take wargames and see if I can replicate historical results. If I can, then I start trying to do better than the historical results. If not, then I become obsessed with replicating the historical results. It's a sickness, sure. But it keeps me off the streets at night.


Never ask me why! You are, however, allowed to ask me how but in this case you appear to have that locked down.

Yeah and exactly that will always give the human player an edge above the AI, latest with the second time, you run the game.
Nevertheless, I don't like the AI being buffed by performning the typical min/maxing. For me historicity is above balance in this case.
Paradox was quite smart in how they included army experience in the game. That at least guides the human player a bit more on a historical road, at least for the beginning of the game. Anyway at some point you are always able to leave the historical route.
Maybe difficulty settings should effect by how far the AI takes "Meta" templates and designs over historical ones.

 

[Nikolai II]

I haven't looked through this thread to see if anyone else brought it up, but I wonder if the paradox HOI4 team would consider adding an "APC" option for tanks that would allow a tank to be turned into a apc like the canadian Kangaroo personnel carrier. I think this would be an interesting thing but I don't know how much they want to expand upon new battalions that would be included in the division designer.

IIRC they did say in post #1 that they considered including APC in the tank builder, but dropped it later.

So it's more like you should start a suggestion thread that they reconsider, because they've already said they're currently not intending to give us that option.

 

[Anaraxes]

adding an "APC" option for tanks that would allow a tank to be turned into a apc like the canadian Kangaroo personnel carrier

Given that ACPs aren't designed with the tank designer, I'm not sure that particular feature will be helpful.

That process does, however, sound a lot like the current one for turning an old tank into an SPG / SPAA. Perhaps it wouldn't be a big change to allow mech equipment to be produced more cheaply by recycling old tanks, as currently happens with the tank variants. The tank designer might bring in new ways to create TD / SPAA / SPGs, but we could still use the old method for producing mech. (That is, just pick the option to recycle the old tank in your mech production line, rather than the from-scratch construction option, and draw down your stockpile of old tanks as the mech get produced.)

Probably won't take long for someone to think of designing a tank that intentionally has cheap armor and no turret, intending them just to become APCs in the future.

 

[Lord_Boreas]

There weren't all that harebrained when they were worked upon. In the late twenties and early thirties tracks wore out so quickly that all kinds of methods were used to get greater mobility with less wear and tear (and lots of tanks were very light). But as track quality improved wheels could be skipped, mostly since this also allowed tanks to be heavier.

Fair enough. I mostly kept up with planes when I was younger and don't have too many good hard copies versions of books or the likes for tanks that go into the mechanical side of things too deeply. Just remember reading some things that sound mechanically overcomplicated or just downright tedious to use but they probably had their reasons for their time. Except multiple turrets they are demons that belong in the deepest darkest corner of hell.

Looking forward to later down the DLC line when we get the aircraft designer/air redone so I can take footage/photos of everything right down to a dachshund that so much as has even the slightest limp that moves in Europe with my F5 Lightnings like the USA actually did.

 

[DaMillerKillR]

I love the approach you're taking at re-imagining Reliability into the tank designer in a more dynamic way. But why stop there? Virtually, every piece of equipment can and should have a Reliability value assigned to it. Although, it would be too far out of the scope for this DLC to add designers for lets say infantry equipment or motorized, etc. It would, however, be simpler to add static changes to production reliability in the Industrial Tech Tree i.e. Concentrated or Dispersed Industry. Each subsequent level thereafter would increase base Production Reliability similar to Efficiency. Furthermore, incorporating a time-based Reliability value onto production lines which only increases the longer the item is in production not only makes the item easier to produce, but also makes it better to use.

This is only an idea that I think could add more depth by making it a calculating decision for players wanting to change production lines too frequently (always wanting the best of the best) or for players keeping a line going because it just works (O'Reliable).

Anyways, looking forward to the new expansion I cannot wait to what you all have in store!

 

[legomanc]

I hope we will be able to make tanks with multiple turrets even though it would probably be an awful choice.

 

[Nikolai II]

I hope we will be able to make tanks with multiple turrets even though it would probably be an awful choice.

...psst, check the spoilered out part of the first post...

 

[bigredsnake]

I would hope that lower research time for tank parts AND ships as well. It's bad enough with Man the Guns having to research every part of the ship now we have to do every part of the tank

 

[Lord_Boreas]

I would hope that lower research time for tank parts AND ships as well. It's bad enough with Man the Guns having to research every part of the ship now we have to do every part of the tank

The only extra research that has been confirmed on the trees are that weapons are tied with Artillery techs and the 4 engine and armour techs in the screenshot on the Dev diary take into account that doctrines have been removed from research and you actually end up with a net loss of techs from what I can see.

 

[Anaraxes]

MtG added the ability to spend xp to shorten research time on the already-short times for those naval modules (compared to the previous whole-hull research times, plus their upgrades), and also significantly increased the rate of earning naval xp to provide more for those expenses. I'd expect the same thing to happen to army xp when the tank designer shows up. (Then the air designer to follow, should that happen.)

That also implies you could spend the extra xp on templates if you preferred, which is one of those factors Paradox is going to have to think, playtest, and probably juggle the balance after release.

 

[Colonizor48]

Yay even more techs to try to keep up to date on. Please add 1-2 extra research slots for all nations and dont make the same mistake as with man the guns naval tech.

 

[xtfoster]

Yay even more techs to try to keep up to date on. Please add 1-2 extra research slots for all nations and dont make the same mistake as with man the guns naval tech.

As has been stated (multiple times) earlier in this thread. The actual net number of techs to research has actually gone down.
1) Doctrines are no longer researched.
2) You no longer research TD/SPArt/SPAAG individually.
3) They did add Engine and Armor upgrades (4 levels of each).
4) I haven't done a side-by-side comparison, but there might be 1 or 2 additional Tank Chassis (the 1934 Medium/Heavy).

So instead of having to research Medium Tank, then M-TD/M-SPArt/M-SPAAG you research the Medium Chassis and keep up-to-date on the Artillery Tree (for guns) and something in the Electronics Tree (for radios).

 

[Colonizor48]

Also modern variations of light, heavy and super heavy tanks would be nice. If hypotheticly in another timeline for some reason a country went with some other type of tank as a standard type of tank. Also ultra heavy tanks(lankreuzer p.1000 ratte)

 

[styroler]

Yay even more techs to try to keep up to date on. Please add 1-2 extra research slots for all nations and dont make the same mistake as with man the guns naval tech.

They are actually taking out alot of techs with this update. Obviously the armor tree is being replaced so we dont have to worry about that and the doctrines are also being removed from the tech tree so if anything we will have less to research not more.

 

[Colonizor48]

Also modern variations of light, heavy, amphibious and super heavy tanks would be nice. If hypotheticly in another timeline for some reason a country went with some other type of tank as a standard type of tank. Also ultra heavy tanks(lankreuzer p.1000 ratte)

 

[Colonizor48]

They are actually taking out alot of techs with this update. Obviously the armor tree is being replaced so we dont have to worry about that and the doctrines are also being removed from the tech tree so if anything we will have less to research not more.

oh