Are carriers useable in the pacific at all?
- Thread starter currylambchop
- Start date
-
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.
Yea, but carriers are still bottom of the pack. Before MTG, carriers could at least do something even against the doomstacks. Carriers doing something and battleships being busted is better than carriers not being able to do anything. Because carriers were an integral part of the war, and them being absolute dumpster tier is immersion and gameplay breaking.
I won't say they are dumpster tier, IC-wise they are better screen-killers than super-heavy BBs. Maybe CVs are C-tier with modified naval bombers, whereas destroyers / CL are A-tier, subs are S-tier, and CAs are dumpster tier (without light cruiser guns).
IIRC, the disruption that CV Fighters will cause to enemy NAVs ONLY is not affected by the "bug". Naval Strike performed by NAVs is handled differently than actual naval combat with NAVs. There certainly isn't any newly arrived penalty.
Carriers have been bottom of the pack since well before MTG. The last patch before they began work on MTG broke carrier planes and made them useless against land-based aircraft, meaning carrier were useless in any sea zone that land-based planes could reach. They didn't patch that for a year until MTG was released, but MTG also gimped carriers in its own way.
Just as PDX is so obsessed with Germany that they tailor much of the game around them (see the tech tree), they seem to love battleships so much they've constructed all the naval mechanics so as to try to replicate Jutland without those pesky new-fangled planes getting in the way.
Yea they're closet wehraboos tbh, especially when they gave germany a random update in the asia expansion lol
I don't see anything about the tech tree that makes it German-centric.
They also aren't obsessed with Germany, they just realize that the entire war the game is about hinges mostly on Germany, and that Germany is easily the most played nation. A Germany that isn't a threat makes playing almost everyone a boring mess. Playing the Soviets wouldn't require much if Germany isn't capable of putting a dent into your lines. Playing any important nation of the Allies would not allow for much fun if Germany has trouble even in the early goings, or if it already fails at the early stages of Barbarossa. Playing any of the European Axis-members suffers a lot when Germany can't get anything done. Only Japan is a bit disconnected from that.
This is a game, and a game always has to take game-balance into account.
The evidence:
1. The dates for tank techs
2. Carrier planes being variants of land-based planes
3. Rocket artillery being a separate unit type
4. Rocket interceptors
5. Anti-aircraft tanks and super-heavy tanks even being unit types
6. Getting its own special Panzerschiffe ship type
7. Battleship and submarine-centric naval mechanics that buff German and Italian naval strength and gimp the strength of navies with carriers
To be fair, almost all Nazi Wunderwaffen techs suck, even more than they did in real life. V1 rockets can't reach London, V2 rockets can be intercepted by interwar fighters flying at 400 km/h. Rocket interceptors and 1945 Jets are worse than 1944 fighters. Super heavy tanks are so niche, to the point where it doesn't even make sense to research them. As for anti-aircraft tanks, the Brits produced about a hundred Centaur AA tanks too, but they stopped producing them due to overwhelming Allied air superiority. I'm not sure what you mean by dates for tank techs, everyone unlocks tech at the same time, and German armor research bonuses aren't better than US/UK research bonuses.
Submarines are OP, or at least far stealthier than they were in real life, I'll give you that.
Historically speaking BBs were already largely considered obsolete for fleet combat at the start of the war. The idea behind the "fast battleship" was that it was a strategic tool. Its main use was in shore bombardment and the ability to interdict lighter vessels by threat it represented. Naval technology had detveloped in such a way that a battle between opposing BB fleets would be a bloodbath. In battle BBs were expected to destroy the enemy screen. The BBs that did fight spent most of the war in docks.
The Man the Guns naval system does an awful job representing this.
The Man the Guns naval system does an awful job representing this.
All that simply begs the question why they're even in the game? Why can you, in a planet-scale strategic game, spend half a year dedicating research to and irrelevant dead-end or ineffective meme? It's like a micro-version of when people make modern day mods and make different research techs for every possible permutation of attachment you can fit to an assault rifle, as if that's anywhere near relevant at a strategic level. It simply betrays they love military tech and want to shoehorn it into a game where it's not appropriate - in Paradox's case, that they love experimental Nazi tech and want to stick in into the game even if it's not appropriate.
The actual solution is to have a unique tech tree for each major, but they've never done that and I don't see them starting now. So baring that, they need to make the tech tree as generic as possible.
Many of HOI4's mechanics cement my belief that the best way to play this game is with a WW1 mod, as that is the war it end up mechanically emulating.
Disagree, AI's burn manpower like China in 1938 but do not really stagnate, they usually have quite dynamic combat, and one AI will collapse quite fast.You do when two AI's fight each other.
I was wondering why carriers are depending on Universal Time rather than local time. Can anyone elaborate on this?