-
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.
Afaik there will not be more new units in DH vanilla than said in the DD.
But feel free to play around new units in mods.
But feel free to play around new units in mods.
Oh, it's also worth noting that while weaker in attack strength, the LCAG brigade has range equivalent to a regular CAG. So your CVLs will duke it out with CVs. (but CVEs still have the more limited range they've had in the past)
That sounds incredibly useful for BB fleets and nations that don't have good fleet carrier techs, to not instantly die horribly. How much more powerful are fleet carriers versus their light cousins?
Perhaps, but then your BB fleet is unlikely to close...
Assuming roughly-equivalent tech year models for both ship and brigade, CVs tend to be roughly twice as powerful as a CVL. CVLs tend to cost slightly over half the cost of a CV in IC/D.
Are the other naval units going to get some love too? I would love to see more BB, BC, CA, CL, and DD models in the tech tree during the WWII years. Any chance of this happening? 
So, CVLs are not IC effective investment but if you want a relatively up to date fleet fast they are your choice?
They weren't. Casualty stats were in AoD and HoI3. And the rule sounds as
I think that the issue was "casualty stats without actual feature implemented = offtopic and history forum" sort of thing. So now (after 1.3) we can discuss them in actual in game context.
Also, AOD has Victory or Valhalla feature which should be close pretty close to suicidal troops.
Last edited:
I don't know, Kannon, but it seems more like "fight untill the last man" and not suicidal... but whatever!
Yaaay, judging by the screenies it seems personnel and equipment has been split up also!
How did you arrive at this conclusion? In-game stats are just that - numbers which the game shows you. That doesn't mean that STR works differently now.
So taking into account larger fleets requiring higher ranking (therefore lower skilled) admirals, and stacking penalties, there won't be any reason to build a CVL other than role playing?
As in RL, they are cheaper overall and they take less time to build than fleet carriers. That can be a quite compelling factor, as it was historically (Independence-class, for e.g.).
even in 1.02 Light carriers rip subs to shreds more so then any other ship . that's just my observations anyway. so they do have a purpose especially as Britain, USA and Japan.
Those statistics for the carriers include planes. I presume that some will be destroyed in battles. What happens if they all die during the battle? will the fleets close? Also do you have to return to port to have them replaced or will it do it on the go? (rather unrealistically i'll add
)
One last question if I may: will there be model names for the new CVE and CVL units? Will make making SKIF that much easier if there are.
That's perfect for historical purposes. CVEs were for escorting transports and convoys. For the US and Japan, CVLs were quick and quick CV supplements intended to fill out carrier attack fleets until the fleet carriers could be completed and brought online (in Japan's case because they didn't have the capacity to build the CVs they needed). Britain and Germany built CVLs as their sole attack carriers in Europe (though Germany never deployed Graf Zeppelin, of course). All four of those nations intended their CVLs to carry fighters that would be top of the line, for the most part (except Britain that had a pathetic state of naval aviation). Any CVEs they built carried only enough planes for a minor fighter presence, but was more concerned with submarine spotting and bombing.