AOD 1.13: Technologies Needed

[Wide Boy]

We could if the minimum screen resolution is changed from 1024 x 768, to something like 1280 x 960 (the next size up keeping the 4:3 ratio). Until then, there's really no expansion that can be done to the vanilla AoD. Does anyone still run their screens at 1024 x 768 or even play on a PC/laptop that can't go higher than 1024 x 768? I doubt it, but the code still supports Windows XP

I would like to see a larger useable UI. 1920 x 1080 is the lowest spec PC monitor nowadays. But that would cause issues with low spec laptop players. Does anyone play on laptop? I guess there probably are. I would think there are higher priorties than this cosmetic change

 

[MJF]

I would like to see a larger useable UI. 1920 x 1080 is the lowest spec PC monitor nowadays. But that would cause issues with low spec laptop players. Does anyone play on laptop? I guess there probably are. I would think there are higher priorties than this cosmetic change

I'll bet plenty of people play on laptops and older units. This is, after all, a 13 year-old "Mod" of an 18 y/o game.

 

[Czarina Julie]

Does anyone play on laptop? I guess there probably are.

Hey, Hey Now. Don't besmirch us laptop users I run the game, and do all the coding, on my 17" Alienware laptop running Win 10 (with manually updates once every 1-2 months) with a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080.

I understand that there are some older folks who 1920 x 1080 might be an issue, so we should look at a lower resolution than 1920 x 1080. That said, I won't give my exact age but I'm a baby boomer or just old

 

[Fürstbischof]

Here are the finalized technologies screens.

The revised screns look like a lot of work. Well done. Thank you very much.

View attachment 940254
We now have 12 screens instead of ten. With all the new brigades, divisions, modifiers, technologies, etc., we needed more room. The related doctrines are now located logically directly below the units it affects (e.g. Infantry -> Land Doctrine).

The first two screens, Statistics and Units, come from the old (1.12 version) Overview screen due to the numerous additional data to report.

Don't get me wrong, but now that I have seen the revised screens, I wonder if it wouldn't have been better to go from 10 to 15 screens. Some screens are a tid bit crowded. Then we'd have been able to use larger 'shields' for the names of techs.

 

[Fürstbischof]

Units:

View attachment 940259

I have one (minor) improvement wish re: the Units screen. It looks a bit odd. Our armed forces have three branches: army, navy and airforce. Well, the screen itself has 3 columns, too. Why not just give each branch its own column and thus separate the unit and brigade models horizontally? ;-)

 

[Czarina Julie]

Don't get me wrong, but now that I have seen the revised screens, I wonder if it wouldn't have been better to go from 10 to 15 screens.

I think we should increase the screen space but without raising the minimum screen resolution above 1024 x 768, it would require more scrolling. Also, I'm just a team member and not sure who can make the decision on raising the minimum screen resolution.

have one (minor) improvement wish re: the Units screen. It looks a bit odd. Our armed forces have three branches: army, navy and airforce. Well, the screen itself has 3 columns, too. Why not just give each branch its own column and thus separate the unit and brigade models horizontally? ;-)

We could look at that in 1.14. To get what you see on 1.13 Units screen I had shorten the text height (pica) and create custom sort orders. So the ground work is done. I do like the idea but need more people to chime in on what they want.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

Here are the finalized technologies screens

As others have said, amazing work Julie!

A mechanized infantry division should start from 1942. Until the end of 1942, the Axis, Allies and Soviets did not have such divisions. Look at the dates of the creation of panzergrenadier divisions and guards mechanized corps. Even the French divisions (division légère mécanique) were more armored.

Bear in mind, they were fielding such divisions in 1942.

Research year does not mean production year. A 1940 research year really means 1941 production year as it means you cannot research mechanised infantry at any decent speed until 1940, and after completing it (likely in late 1940 for most nations), you're looking at retooling and production times slowing it down.

Yes I've seen Germany rush it and complete it by early 1939, but that is an extreme example. Perhaps it can be tied to also having to research 1939 ARM or LARM beforehand to slow it down, but I also wouldn't adjust the research date.

EDIT: Just realised it's been edited so that 1940 MEC requires 1937 CAV and 1938 MOT (and 1937 AC?), which might be enough in itself.

Is there a possibility to create more than 12 screens ?

Hopefully for modders there is, but for the base game I'd say 12 tech screens is more then plenty.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

I have one (minor) improvement wish re: the Units screen. It looks a bit odd. Our armed forces have three branches: army, navy and airforce. Well, the screen itself has 3 columns, too. Why not just give each branch its own column and thus separate the unit and brigade models horizontally? ;-)

Ah, that would be handy, but I'd rather any UI focus be on the Units screen on the map (using the DH model of being able to see what is in which army - ie both colour coding and unit symbols next to each corps/army name to show that corps/army is primarily ARM, or MEC, or MOT, or INF etc).

 

[KostasL]

Hopefully for modders there is, but for the base game I'd say 12 tech screens is more then plenty.

Well...the vanilla AoD 1.0 was more than plenty for me, too...when it was released!

Then....and after so many years...HoI games took the wrong turn, we saw no new game in the tradition of HoI and HoI2....AoD and DH are the last ones!

After more than 10 years, we desperately need some hardcoded improvements of the game to keep it alive!

If not more screens...then more space for each screen would be an improvement.

 

[tessbo]

As others have said, amazing work Julie!


Bear in mind, they were fielding such divisions in 1942.

Research year does not mean production year. A 1940 research year really means 1941 production year as it means you cannot research mechanised infantry at any decent speed until 1940, and after completing it (likely in late 1940 for most nations), you're looking at retooling and production times slowing it down.

Yes I've seen Germany rush it and complete it by early 1939, but that is an extreme example. Perhaps it can be tied to also having to research 1939 ARM or LARM beforehand to slow it down, but I also wouldn't adjust the research date.

EDIT: Just realised it's been edited so that 1940 MEC requires 1937 CAV and 1938 MOT (and 1937 AC?), which might be enough in itself.

Hopefully for modders there is, but for the base game I'd say 12 tech screens is more then plenty.

Here is the first mechanized corps formed from November 1 to November 10, 1942, which included mechanized brigades. Before this mechanized corps, were there mechanized divisions that fought on the battlefields of WW2?

1st Guards Mechanized Corps (Soviet Union) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Let's say, playing a single game as Germany, I will 100% learn the technology of 1940 MEC before the middle or before the end of 1940. I will have enough time to build mechanized divisions (Panzergrenadier) for Operation Barbarossa, which is not historical, since the Panzergrenadier divisions did not take part in the war with the Soviet Union in 1941-1942.

It would be logical to link the year of research of mechanized infantry with tank divisions. Because the structure of the tank divisions included mechanized regiments. First we research 41 TANK MEDIUM, then 1941 MEC. 1941 would have been a more historical and logical year for mechanized infantry research to begin.
41 TANK MEDIUM ----> 1941 MEC
43 TANK MEDIUM ----> 1943 MEC

I want the game to be more or less historical and logical.

 

[Czarina Julie]

EDIT: Just realised it's been edited so that 1940 MEC requires 1937 CAV and 1938 MOT (and 1937 AC?), which might be enough in itself.

To confirm your "...1937 AC?" The 1940 Mechanized division requires the 1937 Armored Car and one of the following:
• 1937 Cavalry
• 1938 Infantry Division (Mot)

After more than 10 years, we desperately need some hardcoded improvements of the game to keep it alive!

Currently, I'm the only hardcoder we have working on AoD at this time. However, I've been retired for over 3 years now and do have a lot of free time. So send, recommend, copy, run a lottery, etc. and post any hardcode ideas everyone. Not saying that every single idea will be implemented but if it's not posted, I can guarantee it won't be even consider. The 1.13 team is good, but we're not psychic.

Ah, that would be handy, but I'd rather any UI focus be on the Units screen on the map (using the DH model of being able to see what is in which army - ie both colour coding and unit symbols next to each corps/army name to show that corps/army is primarily ARM, or MEC, or MOT, or INF etc).

You'll have to wait until I redo the entire Intell screen. Not going much more in detail about it right (though there are some posts here on the forum) since it will contain much more intell than the crumb it give us now. I can see Intell becoming much more something players will need to look at and fund.

If not more screens...then more space for each screen would be an improvement.

I still stand by raising the minimum screen resolution to allow more room without having to use scrolling. We, the team, need to find out who can make that decision.

It would be logical to link the year of research of mechanized infantry with tank divisions. Because the structure of the tank divisions included mechanized regiments. First we research 41 TANK MEDIUM, then 1941 MEC. 1941 would have been a more historical and logical year for mechanized infantry research to begin.
41 TANK MEDIUM ----> 1941 MEC
43 TANK MEDIUM ----> 1943 MEC

I would recommend changing the 1940 Mechanized to 1941 and adding the tanks as required techs to the ACs. So something like this:

• 1940 Infantry (Mech) becomes 1941
  • Required:
    • 1940 Armored Car
    • 1941 Tank, Medium
    • 1941 Infantry (Mot)
• 1942 Infantry (Mech) becomes 1943
  • Required:
    • 1941 Infantry (Mech)
    • 1943 Armored Car
    • 1943 Tank, Medium
    • 1941 Infantry (Mot)
• 1944 Infantry (Mech) becomes 1945
  • Required:
    • 1943 Infantry (Mech)
    • 1943 Armored Car
    • 1945 Main Battle Tank (MBT)
    • 1944 Infantry (Mot)
• 1947 Infantry (Mech) becomes 1948
  • Required:
    • 1945 Infantry (Mech)
    • 1943 Armored Car
    • 1947 Main Battle Tank (MBT)
    • 1947 Infantry (Mot)
• 1951 Infantry (Mech) becomes 1955
  • Required:
    • 1948 Infantry (Mech)
    • 1951 Armored Car
    • 1955 Main Battle Tank (MBT)
    • 1951 Infantry (Mot)
• 1964 Infantry (Mech)
  • Required:
    • 1955 Infantry (Mech)
    • 1951 Armored Car
    • 1964 Main Battle Tank (MBT)
    • 1963 Infantry (Mot)

I would then have a technology branching off of the armored cars, called Armored Personnel Carriers, that would have technologies like:

• Half-Tracks - 2 model years
• Wheeled Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs) - these would be BTRs, M-8s, any armored wheel vehicle designed to carry troops
• Tracked APCs - BMPs, APCs, etc.

These would not create any new playable unit or brigade, but would be required for later WW2 and post-WW2 year Mechanized Infantry. All of the above is easy to do right now without having to touch any other files.

Something we do need to remember is that Armor divisions are not all tanks and Mechanized division are not all APCs. A good generic rule of thumb to use is that an Armored division is 2/3 tanks & 1/3 mechanized (usually 2 tank heavy brigades & 1 APC/infantry brigade) whereas the Mechanized division is the opposite.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

I believe this would ensure we never see mechanised infantry used again, that is simply far too costly to make them worthwhile.

 

[Czarina Julie]

I believe this would ensure we never see mechanised infantry used again, that is simply far too costly to make them worthwhile.

The problem is what came first, the chicken or the egg?
Late WW2 and post-WW2 armored and mechanized divisions had both tanks and mechanized infantry. So if we make all the mechanized divisions required to have the latest tanks researched then, shouldn't the late & post-WW2 armored divisions required the latest mechanized division?
Now we have the what came first, the chicken or the egg?

My new revised idea, starting with the 1945 Infantry (Mech) and the 1945 Armored Divisions:

• 1945 Infantry (Mech) required:
  • 1943 Infantry (Mech)
  • 1943 Armored Car/New APC branch comparable year tech
  • 1943 Medium Tank
• 1945 Armored required:
  • 1943 Medium Tank
  • 1943 Armored Car/New APC branch comparable year tech
  • 1943 Infantry (Mech)

Then the following year technologies for both Infantry (Mech) and Armored divisions would have only 2 requirements:

• The previous year's technology for that unit (e.g. 1948 Infantry (Mech) --> 1945 Infantry (Mech))
• The comparable year Armored Car/New APC branch model/technology.

This way we're not getting into the chicken & egg debate since the 1945 mechanized and armor uses the opposite's previous year technologies. Then to simulate the mechanization of the Infantry (Mech) & the Infantry (Mech) units in late/post-WW2 armor divisions, the AC/APC fills that role.

So only one Infantry (Mech) technology will require that tanks be researched and only one Armored technology requires that Infantry (Mech) be researched.

 

[KostasL]

This way we're not getting into the chicken & egg debate

I thought the answer to this was already known!

The first chicken came out of an egg...which was made by the last prechicken!!!

 

[Epokextra]

IMO, there is no serious issue with Mech 40 as things currently stand.

When playing with Germany, you have to prioritize between Mech 40 and MOT 41.

The latter comes with a blueprint from the collapse of Czekoslovakia, so the duration is similar.

If you look at combat stats, MOT 41 is at least on par with MECH 40.
MOT 41: HA 4, SA 14, DEF 25, TOUGH 21, SOFT 83
MECH 40 : HA 5, SA 14, DEF 20, TOUGH 20, SOFT 70

One might say MECH 40 is slightly better in plains whereas MOT 41 is better in rough and forest.

In the end, I always prioritize MOT 41 because it allows me to upgrade my existing MOT divisions.

If you prioritize MECH 40, you should start several lines in late 39 in order to have received them in substantial amount for Barbarossa. They won’t have any real impact before then. Even so, your Barbarossa won’t be more powerful as these units are not really better than MOT 41 and cost more.

However, I would not rule out improving the Tech tree (following the guidance of Czarina Julie) if some Allied nations tend to build MECH early in most games.

I just feel the situation is fine with Germany.

 

[tessbo]

I looked up information on mechanized infantry and this is what I found.

In fact, Germany's WW2 mechanized infantry was motorized infantry with a small number of armored personnel carriers. There were simply not enough armored personnel carriers and it was expensive to fully equip a division with such equipment. The Soviet army also did not have fully mechanized divisions for the same reason as in the German WW2 army. The Soviets received under Lend-Lease from the allies 3034 M3 Scout Car units and about 1158 armored personnel carriers of various modifications.

Танковый ленд-лиз в СССР — Википедия

ru.wikipedia.org

Quote:
Because the German economy could not produce adequate numbers of its half-track APC, barely a quarter or a third of the infantry in Panzer or Panzergrenadier divisions were mechanized, except in a few favored formations. The rest were moved by truck. However, most German reconnaissance units in such formations were also primarily mechanized infantry and could undertake infantry missions when it was needed.

Mechanized infantry - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote:
These vehicles were meant to enable Panzergrenadiere to accompany panzers and provide infantry support as required. In practice, there were never enough of them to go around, and most Panzergrenadier units had to make do with trucks for transport.

Sd.Kfz. 251 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote:
Of 226 panzergrenadier battalions in the whole of the German Army, Luftwaffe and Waffen SS in September 1943, only 26 were equipped with armoured half tracks, or just over 11 percent. The rest were equipped with trucks.

Panzergrenadier - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote:
Red Army mechanized infantry were generally carried on tanks or trucks, with only a few dedicated lend-lease half-track APCs.

Mechanized infantry - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All mechanized divisions existed only on paper as mechanized, in fact these divisions would be motorized or tank.
Maybe you don’t need a mechanized infantry slot in the game at all?

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

Certainly interesting information, but I personally prefer having MEC in the game. They are already expensive to research, build and maintain. Plus you answered your own question, and implicitly shown the US had significant mechanised forces (or at least had the capacity to build them).

It's more vanilla AoD's generous resource amounts on the map that allow players to ignore the importance of oil and really any of the resources needed to fuel their war industry.

IRL there were even proponents in the German army to "demotorise" the entire thing as oil became such a severe problem for them.

There are several mods that remedy this, and resources become a lot more important.

 

[Epokextra]

During the war, Germany produced nearly 30,000 Sd Kfz 250 and 251 (half-tracks).

Most of them went to Panzer Divisions. In 1944-45, a Panzer Division included one Panzer regiment, one Motorized regiment and one PanzerGrenadier regiment. Usually, PanzerGrenadier Divisions were Mot divisions with one organic Tank destroyer battalion (and other smaller assets). There were exceptions.

Of course, the orders of battle of US and Soviet armored and mechanized divisions were quite different. With AOD's model, it's impossible to recreate such a wide variety of units (German, US, Soviet...) throughout the whole war (early, mid, late war).

With Hearts of Iron 3, players were able to compose their own specific division types. Each type of division included various types of regiments and battalions. Awesome but too complex.

If you want to slightly improve on the current system, you might create two types of 1941 tank divisions, one equipped with some halftracks, the other unequipped. The same with 1943 and 1945 models. Likewise for each model of mech division, you might choose to build either a division with limited equipment or a fully equipped one.

 

[Czarina Julie]

During the war, Germany produced nearly 30,000 Sd Kfz 250 and 251 (half-tracks).

Most of them went to Panzer Divisions. In 1944-45, a Panzer Division included one Panzer regiment, one Motorized regiment and one PanzerGrenadier regiment. Usually, PanzerGrenadier Divisions were Mot divisions with one organic Tank destroyer battalion (and other smaller assets). There were exceptions.

Of course, the orders of battle of US and Soviet armored and mechanized divisions were quite different. With AOD's model, it's impossible to recreate such a wide variety of units (German, US, Soviet...) throughout the whole war (early, mid, late war).

With Hearts of Iron 3, players were able to compose their own specific division types. Each type of division included various types of regiments and battalions. Awesome but too complex.

If you want to slightly improve on the current system, you might create two types of 1941 tank divisions, one equipped with some halftracks, the other unequipped. The same with 1943 and 1945 models. Likewise for each model of mech division, you might choose to build either a division with limited equipment or a fully equipped one.

I like your more simplified version (last paragraph) but with a slight modification.

For every maneuver division we should have at least 6 types that eventually merge down to 4:

1. We could start with 6 which would cover all of the Post-WW1 through WW2:
   1. Axis - Nationalist Socialist Germany, Fascist Italy, Fascist Hungary, Fascist anything, and those South American countries that had Axis advisors (Argentina, Chile)
   2. Soviet/Warsaw Pact - Communist countries not allied with Communist China.
   3. Chinese/Maoist - Self-explanatory
   4. Commonwealth/European - European nations before NATO doctrines...UK, France, Denmark, Nordic countries, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and a few South American countries.
   5. US - Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Brazil, Liberia, Mexico, and a few South American countries.
   6. Regional - For smaller non-aligned nations like Central America, the smaller countries gaining independence after WW2
2. Post WW2 would merged down into 4:
   1. Axis, US, & Commonwealth would merge into a NATO structure. There could countries in this structure that are not NATO countries. It's only a TO&E structure and organization.
   2. Soviet/Warsaw Pact structure
   3. Chinese/Maoist structure
   4. Regional becomes Non-Aligned structure.
3. Each of the above 6 Post-WW1 through WW2 and the 4 Post WW2 structures would have separate types of divisions and these divisions would a package deal, not user configurable. So an Axis Armor division would have a different amount of tanks, half-tracks, MI, Arty, Eng, Maint, S&T, etc. than a Soviet division and both of them different from a Commonwealth division, US, regional. This way 1 commonwealth infantry division (@ 17,000) would have more strength than a Soviet rifle (infantry) division (@ 12,000). What this would resolve is the 1 to 1 (AoD) ratio between nations, which is not historical.

This would all be great to have, but it would be a huge undertaking and if done, in a patch/release of its own.

 

[tessbo]

Armor & Artillery:

1. Anti-Tank Artillery technology was correctly spelled Anti-Tank Gun (or Cannon).

2. Tech 36 Tank Medium is best given to light tanks:

18 Tank Light
31 Tank Light
36 Tank Light
38 Tank Light
41 Tank Light
43 Tank Light
51 Tank Light
64 Tank Airborne

38 Tank Medium
41 Tank Medium
43 Tank Medium

I do not want to give examples of the production of medium tanks in terms of quantity and year of production. You can find information on the Internet yourself.
P.S. If I'm not mistaken, only the Soviet Union had early T-28 medium tanks.

T28 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In other countries, they appeared later, such tanks as M2 (medium tank), Pz.Kpfw.III, M11 / 39 (Carro armato M11 / 39), etc.

Why should medium tanks start from 1938?
Here is an example from Germany:

Panzer III - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

About 35 Panzer III medium tanks were produced in 1937-1938.

Year of operation of the tank since 1938.