CORE brigade reordering

[Zsumi]

Here is what i am thinking of:

1)Merge armored_car + b_u8(cavalry) as "recon" low number models are cav and higher once armoured car's

For low tech country scrap all the armoured car models and leave just the cav models.
This can result in a ARM, LARM, MEC having the possibility of have a cav brigade on player hands.
This saves 1 brigade slot​

2)Merge Torpedo DD(naval_torpedoes_s) and 610mm Torpedo(b_u17) as one

For any county other than Jap scrap all 610mm models so they cant build them and leave the normals
This saves 1 brigade slot(total 2)​

3)Merge Submarines heavy(naval_mines), large(b_u16), normal(naval_torpedoes_l) as one from low normal to large to heavy

For any county other than Jap scrap all heavy models so they cant build them
For AI only ENG uses both large + normal all others use just 1 type
This saves 2 brigade slots(total 4)​

4)Merge RArt into Art possibly as model's or stats

Personally i have never liked RART as a separate from ART as they are same just the "gun" changes.
As no need to separate INF whit assault rifle and INF whit rifle whit bolt mechanism
This saves 1 brigade slot(total 5)​

5)Merge VHART(b_u5) into ART OR MART

This model is not used by AI and don't think many players use it.
Mayby replace any HQ that has it whit MART(b_u5)?
This saves 1 brigade slot(total 6)​

Now what to use the freed slots?

For me one aspect of CORE that is very different from any other mod is the ship Designs but due to UI limitations its hard to use
There are total of 5 different capital designs(Raider, Large, Fast(+IMP), Armour, Armarment(+IMP).
Also total of 7 cruiser designs Minelayer, Raider, Scout(+IMP), Armour, Torpedo Battery, Armarment(+IMP), 610mm+IMP
​

The number of freed slots + unused(+3 up to b_u20) is not enough to put all options available to player.

So here is my suggestion:

Event chain that will activate duplicates of the designs but just one of the models.
Short exampleusing 2 extra brigade slots for duplicates of b_u2)

Germany activating 2 events and selecting Armour and Fast capital designs = can build 3 types BB(+3 BC)
When adding a BB/BC to build queue player will have 5 or 6(AA) options to select brigades from this is something that can be exploited but there are better exploits...

Now for cruisersusing 3 extra brigade slots for duplicates of b_u3)
Germany activating 3 events and selecting Raider, Armour and Scout cruiser designs.
This will allow player to build new Deutschland's or make them bit faster, better armoured or whit bigger guns.​

A possible way to do it:

As event as limited in having 4 choices cruiser selections will be needed to split.

For capitals 1 event is needed per brigade slot
action_a = {

name = "Raider"
command = { type = activate_unit_type which = b_u18 }
command = { type = new_model which = b_u18 value = 6 }​

}
action_b = {

name = "Large"
command = { type = activate_unit_type which = b_u18 }
command = { type = new_model which = b_u18 value = 8 }​

}
action_c = {

name = "Fast"
command = { type = activate_unit_type which = b_u18 }
command = { type = new_model which = b_u18 value = 10 }​

}
action_d = {

name = "Armor"
command = { type = activate_unit_type which = b_u18 }
command = { type = new_model which = b_u18 value = 12 }​

}​

Naturally there is no need to do all the merging of brigades i put above, but whit just 3 slots it will add some diversity but not much.
About 2 slots for BB/BC and 2 for cruisers as well will make it much easier to make more diverse fleets.

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

You've definitely put some thought into this and I'm glad you like to use the Naval Design Brigades. The issues with building them is something I considered during the design phase. Generally the choices are ordered so that the most advanced Brigade is usually the best choice. And this is the one you get by default if you build the ship with the Brigade attached. The work around is to build the ship without the Design Brigade and build the desired Design Brigade independently. This works just fine. But it is a bit clunky and kind of a pain to manage. I'd add that it generally works well for the AI.

OTOH, what you are proposing is somewhat problematic as it allows multiple Design Brigades to get applied to the same ship. This is possible since there are typically open attachment slots for thing like AAA. So you could end up with a BB with Fast and Armour. While this would be good for some limited situations, this isn't really how it was designed to work.

The other issue here is it requires a lot of scripting to make it work for both the player and the AI. You'd need lots of events as well as a lot of AI file changes. The AI portion would actually be the biggest pain as there are a lot of variations for Unit Construction that would need to be edited.

Finally, I feel like the Brigade merge portion is a step backwards. Combining Brigades reduces fidelity and makes it harder to script AI behavior. I think the current structure works fairly well and revising it would be a lot of work for rather limited payback.

mm

 

[Zsar1]

Generally agree with dec152000, but in case of the torpedoes, mayhap we should consider it: There really is no reason to build normal torpedo designs when the awesome 610mm Torpedo is available.
Indeed, mayhap we should scrap all the normal torpedo brigades for JAP anyway.

 

[Zsumi]

On ships:

Yes i know that whit this system there is a way for player to cheat but if a player whants to cheat there are alot of better ways to do it.
Regarding AI it does not need to use the system at all. By leaving the b_u2, b_u3 as they are the ai files dont need any chages and AI will build ships as it used to.

On submarines only 1 country use large and normal and thats england all other country's use just one type normal or large(french i think) and JAP its heavy. So yes this will impact 1 countrys ability to make multiple submarine types but is it realy needed?
And as Zsa1 noted no sence for JAP to use other than heavy submarine brigade

On Land:
I did a quick "find in files" regarding the armored car and cavalry brigades and dint see any contry's ai files using both, only car or cavalry but none used both.
This makes it so that the changes to ai files are only swapping b_u8 to armored_car and scrapping the "car" models for low tech contry's and cavalry for high tech country's. As high tech country AI files dont use cavalry and low tech country dont use armored cars nothing is lost.

On the very heavy artillary i think i dint find a single refffrence to building it in the AI files.


Over all the design of what i had in mind is so that it gives player more options(designs) whitout harming the AI or making lot of work to get it working.

Now on what needs to be done if making this just for player:
Few duplicates of b_u2 and b_u3 slots b_u18, b_u19, b_u20 are free already.
Editing of tech files(Industrial) simple duplicating and swapping id(b_u2 -> u_b20) job

If mergeing armored_car and cav(b_u8):
Adding cavalry models to armored_car before the "car" models + empty to prevent swapping of model
Renaming in AI files(b_u8 -> armored_car)
Making event to scrap the not used side for AI, option for player
If mergeing sub brigades
If all in one( ENG AI will not be able to build 2 types)
Renaming in AI files(not meny)
If merge into 2 files(ENG AI can build as before)
Renaming in AI files(1 line edit less than above or 2?)

Granted whit that it will get working but brigade naming(model names and stuff) will not be "fine" but working (prop the moust time consuming part)

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

IIRC I built it that way when I wasn't sure if the upgrade would work for models that had already been scrapped. This was an issue as JAP has OOB units that aren't 610mm. But Upgrade does seem to work ok for those models. At this point, it would be quite a bit of work to merge the 610 mm Torpedo Attachments into the standard ones. It also would cause some relatively minor issues with production modifiers as the 610mm models are substantially more expensive than the standard ones. I'd be willing to deal with that if we really needed the slots. But at this point I don't see this as being worth the effort required.

mm

 

[unmerged(526990)]

I don't really understand all the technical ins and outs, and can't comment at all on how hard any of this would be to implement, so speaking purely as a mere player who usually plays as the UK:

- I very rarely build submarines anyway, so wouldn't miss the absence of the extra option. I doubt that many UK players would.

- The same with the very heavy artillery. I'm not sure that I've ever built any.

- I love the naval aspect of the game, and as such, it's a shame that I never take advantage of the ship customisation that CORE offers (I always just stick with the defaults). This is basically for the reasons mentioned above. Ultimately, I'm just not sure what I'd end up with, especially in terms of ending up with brigades I couldn't attach to anything, etc. So changes that made this aspect of the game more accessible would be welcome, although I completely concede that there are probably other things that deserve development time much more.

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

I will give this some more thought. I personally think that the current structure works fine. However, I do understand that it is not optimal being forced to build the desired Attachment separate from the base ship and then add it back in. I'd add that due to the way the game calculates Upgrade costs that any combination of Brigades only works properly where it is strictly an either/or choice. So merging Brigade types is problematic.

I'm definitely not too keen on eliminating current Brigade options. I suspect that some players would not like some of the changes being proposed. I for one actually build Cavalry attachments on some units.

One other point to note is that the open slots do have some other possible uses. So this isn't the only possible usage. One idea I've been toying with for quite awhile is adding a Surface Search Attachment to NAV units. This would enable fitting them with improved equipment based on radar research. Just haven't had time to script it.

mm