• 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.

Mnoracle

Captain
101 Badges
Feb 5, 2003
479
70
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Knights of Pen and Paper 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Sengoku
  • Sword of the Stars
Another one unbalanced thing

Just take a look at second level (basic) Torpedoes planes and Naval bombers.
1) Why TP such a killer beast? It supposed to be light aircraft. And just imaging playing for Britane I can put 3 such uber-TP on the one carrier.
2) It looks strange to me that Naval bombers are weaker (by the all parametrs) compared to TP. Plane stupid isn't it?
3) The only parametr which is better for Naval Bomber is range. But this is another weird thing. Why Naval bomber range twise as big as range for Strategic Bomber?

This parametrs for second level planes. Havn't checked others.
 

Iron Marshal

Second Lieutenant
23 Badges
Jul 3, 2002
141
3
Visit site
  • Majesty 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III
Tech and unit cost

My point above about small subs is really one manifestation of a larger issue. The way the game engine works, combined with the existence of stat-enhancing technology, tend to make cheap units very attractive -- at least for naval and air units. For two examples, look at carriers and fighters. Currently, the Fleet Carrier is really your best buy -- there's very little reason to invest in technology to build large carriers or supercarriers. For the extra plane capacity and statistics, they're simply too expensive.

Likewise for fighters. With current CORE stats, the Advanced Interceptor is a more effective air combat unit for your industrial dollar than is the basic jet, the improved jet, the VTOL, or even the advanced jet. Only when you get to supersonic fighters do you find a more effective unit -- and those come so late in the game that there's little point in researching all the way there. Because of this, it's really hard to justify researching rocket technology at all. And that's a shame, because I think in game terms that decision should be more difficult to make.

What's killing the jets is their cost. Was there a particular reason why jet fighters were made so expensive relative to their propeller-driven brethren?
 

unmerged(14683)

HoI2 Shtrafnik
Feb 12, 2003
5.432
0
Visit site
Re: Tech and unit cost

Originally posted by Iron Marshal
My point above about small subs is really one manifestation of a larger issue. The way the game engine works, combined with the existence of stat-enhancing technology, tend to make cheap units very attractive -- at least for naval and air units. For two examples, look at carriers and fighters. Currently, the Fleet Carrier is really your best buy -- there's very little reason to invest in technology to build large carriers or supercarriers. For the extra plane capacity and statistics, they're simply too expensive.

Likewise for fighters. With current CORE stats, the Advanced Interceptor is a more effective air combat unit for your industrial dollar than is the basic jet, the improved jet, the VTOL, or even the advanced jet. Only when you get to supersonic fighters do you find a more effective unit -- and those come so late in the game that there's little point in researching all the way there. Because of this, it's really hard to justify researching rocket technology at all. And that's a shame, because I think in game terms that decision should be more difficult to make.

What's killing the jets is their cost. Was there a particular reason why jet fighters were made so expensive relative to their propeller-driven brethren?

As far as I know, rocketry is the problem of vanilla HoI as well. Usually players are able to finish game until 1942-43, so they even don't need rocket fighters, and AI is usually not able to cross the level of jet/rocket airforce.

In most cases best developing AI (USA) is able to reach advanced figter level in 1943-44, then it stops there (because it got no rocket techs for new engines). That means, that only German player needs rocket technology to get an edge against US Air Force, and only if the invasion on USA is scheduled on 1944. Advanced planes will be not so numerous nor advanced to win the air battle over the States.
Other players don't need so rocket technology (what's funny, exactly as in real life), they only need a lot of advanced planes.
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Anti Tank Rifles

This is WAY to powerful (CORE 0.53) it needs to be dropped back to the basic HOI 1.05.

EDIT: Please move this thread to Land Tech--SORRY!
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Tech Tree Problems

I agree. In trying fix Wire Guided AT missles, which don't (in 0.53) for example require HEAT technology, I found ICBMs don't require any electronics technology--WRONG!

I'm gonna test my Wire Guided AT missle fix which ripple back all the way to AT Rifles tonight. When I am pretty confident I have this down I will post it in the Land Tech, put a note here, and look at rocket tech--which by the way dousn't require chemistry in HOI or CORE.
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
A untested quick fix is adding Telemetric Guidance to rocket development. This wil require a lot of electronics development to do rockets/ICBMs. Back to Wire Guided AT ;-)


See beloe:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

level = { # Flying Rocket Development
id = 7600
name = TECH_LEVEL_ROCKET_7_NAME
desc = TECH_LEVEL_ROCKET_7_DESC

cost = 25
time = 180
neg_offset = 45
pos_offset = 90

application = { # Advanced Gyroscope Autopilot
id = 7601
name = TECH_APP_ROCKET_7_1_NAME
desc = TECH_APP_ROCKET_7_1_DESC

required = { 3600 7203 } # added Telemetric Guidance by KPM
 

MateDow

CORE Grand Admiral
3 Badges
Mar 18, 2003
1.755
0
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Re: Tech Tree Problems

Originally posted by Kevin Mc Carthy
I agree. In trying fix Wire Guided AT missles, which don't (in 0.53) for example require HEAT technology, I found ICBMs don't require any electronics technology--WRONG!

I'm gonna test my Wire Guided AT missle fix which ripple back all the way to AT Rifles tonight. When I am pretty confident I have this down I will post it in the Land Tech, put a note here, and look at rocket tech--which by the way dousn't require chemistry in HOI or CORE.

If you are interested in doing the research for making a detailed rocketry tech tree (like armor or naval tech trees) I would be willing to assist in coding and testing it. I don't have enough knowledge to make the changes, but it seems a little simple now compared to some of the other trees. I really like the idea of more interconnections so a player can't blitz through that tech tree to launch V-2s at their opponents (not that they do a lot of good :)). MDow
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Re: Re: Tech Tree Problems

Originally posted by MateDow
If you are interested in doing the research for making a detailed rocketry tech tree (like armor or naval tech trees) I would be willing to assist in coding and testing it. I don't have enough knowledge to make the changes, but it seems a little simple now compared to some of the other trees. I really like the idea of more interconnections so a player can't blitz through that tech tree to launch V-2s at their opponents (not that they do a lot of good :)). MDow

I am working and testing the chain of infantry anti tank weapons and I think I have almost got a much better historical/logical/scientific reseach chain. Where should this be posted? However, the interaction with Panzer techs will be very dificult to evaluate.

I was wrong in one area, Balistic Missiles (V2) require Improved Electromechanical Computers. A quick fix for ICBMs is below--this should prevent tech rushing to ICBMS in Rockets, and also make ICBMs very dificult to acquire before 1948. I will try to further rocket reseach and submit a draft in to you within 2 weeks.

Now for my simple fix to ICBMS (which should make the next CORE release):



application = { # ICBM Guidance System Computer
id = 7972
name = TECH_APP_ROCKET_12_2_NAME
desc = TECH_APP_ROCKET_12_2_DESC

required = { 7942 7602 3974} # Advanced Electronic Computers added by KPM
chance = 90
cost = 12
time = 150
neg_offset = 30
pos_offset = 60

effects = {
command = { }
}
}
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Originally posted by Steel
Do you have an updated tech file and a list of changes? Zip them and put them on some FTP space, post the URL here so the rest of the team can review them. If you don't have FTP space then email them to alf@melachea.demon.co.uk and I'll host them.

Emailed.
 

pimparel

Wargamer Fanatic
46 Badges
Feb 12, 2003
1.934
13
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Prison Architect
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
My humble and long contribution

Infantry

1) Amphibious Warfare Equipment, like the Paratrooper Warfare Equipment should give a bonus to soft attack, as they improved the resisitance of the equipment to the rigous of the salted sea
2) Mine-Clearing Equipment should have a medium tank prototype or similar as requisite, to represent the modifications made to some tanks on the to clean the fields like the picture used on the same tech.
3) Standardized Ammunition, Cargo Space have infantry supply reduced by 0.1 and all others 0.2, I understand that this must have be used to create some kind of balance, but infantry should have the biggest winner on this tech, cause the Army change was focused in the supply of the infantry, their jack-of-all-trades, not the way around.
4) "... Tube-Launched Rockets" all of the improve Hard attack of Militia, so the Army supplied Rockets to Militia but forgot the service rifles? I think that you can create a system that the militia should be one or two steps behind. So when you research improved SMG, the basic SMG, should be available to the militias and so on.
5) And the Basic Assault Rifle wasn't fitted to infantry too? And the Improved Assualt Rifle version was? The Army must be dumb!!!
6) The Basic Magnetic AT Mines increase the HA but the
improved Magnetic AT Mines increase the G.Defense, why? What is the logic, it should be applied on the same modifier.
7) The ENG brigades should have more bonus increase, the ART, AA and AT are considered improved during the game, but the ENG are relegated to a 2nd place.

Armoured

1) Why Basic Amphibious Tank have shore attck bonus to ARM and MEC, and the Improved/Advanced Amphibious Tank only to ARM. And the top-tech the Submersible Tank have bonus to both?
2) .30/.50 Cal AAMG wasn't fitted to MEC division too?
3) The Enginnering Tank (290mm Mortar) as in the discription, shouldn't be applied only to ENG brigades?
4) Due the "... Personnel Carriers" tech the MEC have 3 speed increase, and it doens't have a MOT counterpart, making MEC faster than MOT.

Electronics

1) It should be more integrated on Late-War vehicles, like MBT's, Advanced Planes and Ships, cause all of the must have a radio or other piece of electronic on them.
2) The Radar of the Night Fighter should be incorporated , as an option to Late-War Planes. Or it was dropped on Hoi Beta development?

Industrial

1) The Industrial Pasteurization should be applied to the Navy too, as them could store more and better food on the ships.

Nuclear

1) Should have some kind of offset to an atomic bombing, like raising the dissident.

Naval

1) A lot of tech has bonus to Shore Attack applied to Cavalry and is something out of reality an Amphibious Cavalry Landing!!! Horses coming from LCI's!!!
2) I don't know if it matters, but on some techs we have "+1. (U)" and others "+1 (U)" the point ? influence in something or the HoI engine takes as 1.0
3) And you have a lot of tech like on the Artillery Tree that should increase the Supply Consumption, like the Air Defense techs.

Artilley

1) Infantry Gun (70mm+) has CAV HA +1, it shouldn't be SA +1? And Why the CAV don't have the bonus of Infantry Gun (30mm+)?

Heavy Aircraft

1) You have a lot of tech like on the Artillery Tree that should increase the Supply Consumption, like the Turret Defense System, they ate Ammo!!!

Light Aircraft

1) If you research a Medium Range Fighter Engine, why the Multirole Fighter has shorter range than the Interceptor? And if they have also TAC Attack, they should escort Dive and Tac Bombers with their extended range.

Land Warfare

1) Why Great Patriotic Warfare is a AI only Tech? It should benefit the player as well, Germany doens't have SS techs. By the way this idea of "National Specific Techs" are GREAT!!!

Air Warfare

1) USA should have a "National Specific Techs" that improves somehow their Airforce.

Naval Warfare

1) Rework the Kamikaze Planes, they should be one time only, like the Rockets.

GREAT WORK by the C.O.R.E. Team
 

MateDow

CORE Grand Admiral
3 Badges
Mar 18, 2003
1.755
0
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Re: My humble and long contribution

Originally posted by pimparel

Naval

1) A lot of tech has bonus to Shore Attack applied to Cavalry and is something out of reality an Amphibious Cavalry Landing!!! Horses coming from LCI's!!![/b]

That doesn't say it is smart to run your horse out of an LCI, but it would be better than swimming it ashore. :D


2) I don't know if it matters, but on some techs we have "+1. (U)" and others "+1 (U)" the point ? influence in something or the HoI engine takes as 1.0

I don't think that it makes any difference.



3) And you have a lot of tech like on the Artillery Tree that should increase the Supply Consumption, like the Air Defense techs.


I will look at that and see. I thought that all of the AA artillery references had been removed from the tree. If they haven't I will have to get most of them out of there. Thank you for the help. MDow
 

unmerged(14683)

HoI2 Shtrafnik
Feb 12, 2003
5.432
0
Visit site
Re: My humble and long contribution

Originally posted by pimparel
Infantry

1) Amphibious Warfare Equipment, like the Paratrooper Warfare Equipment should give a bonus to soft attack, as they improved the resisitance of the equipment to the rigous of the salted sea

Balance, balance... We already have to many bonuses to attack of marine units. I will have to test it, but IMO marines are good enough.

Originally posted by pimparel

2) Mine-Clearing Equipment should have a medium tank prototype or similar as requisite, to represent the modifications made to some tanks on the to clean the fields like the picture used on the same tech.

What about bangalores, hand held mine detectors and other, non-armour equipment? I undestand the picture suggest that this tech is mainly mine-plow, but it's not only that.

Originally posted by pimparel

3) Standardized Ammunition, Cargo Space have infantry supply reduced by 0.1 and all others 0.2, I understand that this must have be used to create some kind of balance, but infantry should have the biggest winner on this tech, cause the Army change was focused in the supply of the infantry, their jack-of-all-trades, not the way around.

Thing to consider... I'll test new values.

Originally posted by pimparel

4) "... Tube-Launched Rockets" all of the improve Hard attack of Militia, so the Army supplied Rockets to Militia but forgot the service rifles? I think that you can create a system that the militia should be one or two steps behind. So when you research improved SMG, the basic SMG, should be available to the militias and so on.
5) And the Basic Assault Rifle wasn't fitted to infantry too? And the Improved Assualt Rifle version was? The Army must be dumb!!!

Basic AR and Improved MP give bonus to militia, beacause when they enter the service, basic variants are hand over to militia units. Just like you suggest. It's not that dumb as you may think... :D

Originally posted by pimparel
6) The Basic Magnetic AT Mines increase the HA but the
improved Magnetic AT Mines increase the G.Defense, why? What is the logic, it should be applied on the same modifier.

Balance. Generally units get too low bonus on defense, and too good on attacks, which results in too short/too high casualties in battles. Besides mines are defensive weapon - first change simply 'symbolize' AT character of those.

Originally posted by pimparel
7) The ENG brigades should have more bonus increase, the ART, AA and AT are considered improved during the game, but the ENG are relegated to a 2nd place.

ENG is the best brigade - it gives speed bonus. It's one of the best bonuses in game. Also, other brigades in late game are more costly and are developed longer - ENG is always the same.

Originally posted by pimparel
Armoured

1) Why Basic Amphibious Tank have shore attck bonus to ARM and MEC, and the Improved/Advanced Amphibious Tank only to ARM. And the top-tech the Submersible Tank have bonus to both?

Bug. All of those should have bonus to ARM and MEC.

Originally posted by pimparel
2) .30/.50 Cal AAMG wasn't fitted to MEC division too?

True. Thing to correct.

Originally posted by pimparel
3) The Enginnering Tank (290mm Mortar) as in the discription, shouldn't be applied only to ENG brigades?

the effect is rather symbolic (check the land doctrines thread to see effects of fort_attack.

Originally posted by pimparel
4) Due the "... Personnel Carriers" tech the MEC have 3 speed increase, and it doens't have a MOT counterpart, making MEC faster than MOT.

Yeap, that's the plan.

Originally posted by pimparel
Electronics

1) It should be more integrated on Late-War vehicles, like MBT's, Advanced Planes and Ships, cause all of the must have a radio or other piece of electronic on them.

Have you ever been inside T-54, early version? :D It has radio, all right. So much for electronics. In case of navy electronics is prerequisite - in case of all other advaced techs so far there is industry technology 'blocade' (Quality Control tech). In later versions we will add more prerequisites, though.

Originally posted by pimparel
2) The Radar of the Night Fighter should be incorporated , as an option to Late-War Planes. Or it was dropped on Hoi Beta development?

Yeap, it was dropped.

Originally posted by pimparel

Industrial

1) The Industrial Pasteurization should be applied to the Navy too, as them could store more and better food on the ships.

True.

Originally posted by pimparel

Nuclear

1) Should have some kind of offset to an atomic bombing, like raising the dissident.

Impossible to do in HoI. Besides, in WW2 era there was no such thing.

Originally posted by pimparel

1) Infantry Gun (70mm+) has CAV HA +1, it shouldn't be SA +1? And Why the CAV don't have the bonus of Infantry Gun (30mm+)?

Bug. Will be corrected.

Originally posted by pimparel

Light Aircraft

1) If you research a Medium Range Fighter Engine, why the Multirole Fighter has shorter range than the Interceptor? And if they have also TAC Attack, they should escort Dive and Tac Bombers with their extended range.


Who said MR had longer range? IRL most of the time planes from MR and ITC groups had very similar range - difference laid in armament and purpose. In 0.6 planes stats will be overhauled though, hope you will like those better.

Originally posted by pimparel
Land Warfare

1) Why Great Patriotic Warfare is a AI only Tech? It should benefit the player as well, Germany doens't have SS techs. By the way this idea of "National Specific Techs" are GREAT!!!

Because it's too good. :D Players got some nice (in 0.6 even more) cool events instead. BTW, I don't get "Germany doens't have SS techs" statement - you mean starting OOB, or what? Beacause they definetly have ability to invent "Elite units" doctrine.

Originally posted by pimparel
Air Warfare

1) USA should have a "National Specific Techs" that improves somehow their Airforce.

Why? Their airforce in CORE is impressive anyway (Improved planes in 1941, advanced in 1943).

Originally posted by pimparel
Naval Warfare

1) Rework the Kamikaze Planes, they should be one time only, like the Rockets.

We are working on those, but it's not true that kamikaze were one time weapon - in many cases when they not soptted target the group was returning to base.

Originally posted by pimparel
GREAT WORK by the C.O.R.E. Team

Thanks! :D
 

unmerged(14683)

HoI2 Shtrafnik
Feb 12, 2003
5.432
0
Visit site
Re: Anti Tank Rifles

Originally posted by Kevin Mc Carthy
This is WAY to powerful (CORE 0.53) it needs to be dropped back to the basic HOI 1.05.

EDIT: Please move this thread to Land Tech--SORRY!

So far it's not moved, so I can answer here... AT rifles were effective AT weapon against most of early war targets. We should remember, that despite what can be seen in documents or movies, medium tank was not prime vehicle present on the battlefields of Poland, France, Mongolia or Finland. Most armoured targets were light tanks, armoured cars and other wheeled vehicles.

I understand that the scale of AT ability of AT rifle and tube launcher (both got +1) is in your opinion wrong (and I can agree with that), but the effect of AT rifle is connected with other elements of tech tree - it's one of modification making tanks more vulnerable (as in reality). Default HoI HA bonuses lead to weird situations, where 3 etrenched infantry divisions, tooled up with 70mm AT guns, basic tube launchers and AT mines got problems with stopping 2 divisions of Pz IVd.
 

unmerged(6545)

Second Lieutenant
Nov 27, 2001
171
0
Visit site
Okay, yes, i am wrong, the HE 111 was a tact bomber, not a strat bomber....hrm...maybe i should figure out how to turn the German Strat bomber graphic into the Tact bomber..i hjust really...realy..REALLY hate the default Tact graphic...
 

unmerged(14683)

HoI2 Shtrafnik
Feb 12, 2003
5.432
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Twisted_Mentat
Okay, yes, i am wrong, the HE 111 was a tact bomber, not a strat bomber....hrm...maybe i should figure out how to turn the German Strat bomber graphic into the Tact bomber..i hjust really...realy..REALLY hate the default Tact graphic...

Talk to guys on Graphics forum - it would be quite easy to change He-111 on German tactical bomber, but you will need something other then default "Lancaster-like" sprite for them... Maybe someone will be interested in that enough to make He-177 "Greif"?
 

Iron Marshal

Second Lieutenant
23 Badges
Jul 3, 2002
141
3
Visit site
  • Majesty 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III
Re: Re: Tech and unit cost

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
As far as I know, rocketry is the problem of vanilla HoI as well.

That's true. Isn't it the intent of CORE to address the shortcomings of vanilla HOI?

Usually players are able to finish game until 1942-43, so they even don't need rocket fighters, and AI is usually not able to cross the level of jet/rocket airforce. In most cases best developing AI (USA) is able to reach advanced figter level in 1943-44, then it stops there (because it got no rocket techs for new engines). That means, that only German player needs rocket technology to get an edge against US Air Force, and only if the invasion on USA is scheduled on 1944. Advanced planes will be not so numerous nor advanced to win the air battle over the States.

All that is true, if you're designing a game solely from the perspective of a human German player. What of the players who prefer another nation? What's more, if you don't have to bother with anything past '44 since the game is over anyhow, then why bother with toys like nuclear subs and supersonic aircraft?

Other players don't need so rocket technology (what's funny, exactly as in real life), they only need a lot of advanced planes.

It's my understanding that the ME-262 was a tough customer for the P-51 and other late-war Allied fighters. It's also my understanding that development of the ME-262 was substantially delayed by German political leaders who wanted bombers rather than fighters. If the ME-262 had been produced in quantity a year or two early, the air war over the Reich might have had quite a different complexion.

HOI (with or without CORE) doesn't currently reflect the history in which jet aircraft were a threat that was overcome at some cost through overwhelming numerical superiority. Instead, jet aircraft technology is a boondoggle, a colossal waste of resources. Is this historically accurate?
 

pimparel

Wargamer Fanatic
46 Badges
Feb 12, 2003
1.934
13
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Shadowrun: Hong Kong
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Prison Architect
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
Thanks

Thanks Copper Nicus and MateDow by the fast response, I will think about your answers and try to come up with another questions.:D

Because it's too good. Players got some nice (in 0.6 even more) cool events instead. BTW, I don't get "Germany doens't have SS techs" statement - you mean starting OOB, or what? Beacause they definetly have ability to invent "Elite units" doctrine

Forgot the question mark (?) to make a point if the human player has the ability to make elite units with are by far one of hte best techs?

As I said GREAT WORK!!!

Gave me reason to play Hoi again, and again and again....
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
Re: Re: Anti Tank Rifles

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
I understand that the scale of AT ability of AT rifle and tube launcher (both got +1) is in your opinion wrong (and I can agree with that), but the effect of AT rifle is connected with other elements of tech tree - it's one of modification making tanks more vulnerable (as in reality). Default HoI HA bonuses lead to weird situations, where 3 etrenched infantry divisions, tooled up with 70mm AT guns, basic tube launchers and AT mines got problems with stopping 2 divisions of Pz IVd.

Could be tanks are too strong in the begining? ;-) Maybe AT mines are too weak?

I look forward to your comments on my proposed increased interconnection between Arty Tech and Inf Tech.
 

Kevin Mc Carthy

Former SF Weapons Sergeant
13 Badges
Jun 25, 2001
3.808
0
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
APDU Ammo in 0.531

The +2 bonus goes to Artillery BDEs. This is nonsense, maybe AT BDEs. However, the possibility that APDU ammo would go into mass production in the HOI timeframe is about nil. Maybe a better answer is that APDU ammo does nothing but enable semimodern tank ammo which would then change the amor attack value to "+3" instead of "+1".