A new set is online. There have been changes to the starting trades of especially Japan. The Netherlands should be now a bit more stable, so canceling trades is now less likely.
-
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.
Last year I made 2 sea-lions with Germany in 1936 GC I think we should make sure that UK protect its shores better. the small pictures shows may 1940. Uk should also build coastal battery.
picture is from the 1.9 testing version
I do believe the AI still builds coastal fort in 1.7 and the new 1.8, but not in the testing version of 1.9
*I suggest that UK has locked garrisons in all grand campaigns.
*UK should have a minimum focus on coastal forts especially in the southern regions.
* I recommend later that UK have an event that gives it 3 militia as (Auxiliary Units) in London whenever UK is invaded by GER,ITA or SOV.
And this guy as a free TT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Gubbins as a free TT
Sinkiang should not be annexed by N.China before they have defeated Japan or Sinkiang joins Japan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang#Republican_era
*The Soviets should have interests in Sinkiang like in history and have a guarantee of Independence in the start of 1936 and 1938 campaigns.
--
*USA and Japan should start the game with blueprints on marine infantry.
picture is from the 1.9 testing version
I do believe the AI still builds coastal fort in 1.7 and the new 1.8, but not in the testing version of 1.9
*I suggest that UK has locked garrisons in all grand campaigns.
*UK should have a minimum focus on coastal forts especially in the southern regions.
* I recommend later that UK have an event that gives it 3 militia as (Auxiliary Units) in London whenever UK is invaded by GER,ITA or SOV.
And this guy as a free TT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Gubbins as a free TT
Sinkiang should not be annexed by N.China before they have defeated Japan or Sinkiang joins Japan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang#Republican_era
*The Soviets should have interests in Sinkiang like in history and have a guarantee of Independence in the start of 1936 and 1938 campaigns.
--
*USA and Japan should start the game with blueprints on marine infantry.
Last edited:
That dumb AI behaviour to fail in coastal defense was the reason for the CORE team to add locked garrisons in beach provinces for several nations usually affected. AFAIR JAP/GER/ENG/USA/CHI got them (AI-only)
If that is so that is because of my infra builds. One solution is to omit the last gear up event for UK and france triggered by the MR-Pact and give those benefits in 1936 already. Imo those peactime modifiers for UK and france are to strong at the moment, they tend to make them weaker than allies really were at the start of the war.
Should they join China in a regular alliance instead?
That may have some strong implications. If the human CHI player wants to annex sinkiang early getting SIK to declare war in CHI will become important.
Since 1.08 both already do start with the blueprint. This is also the reason why japan AI starts research at the start of the 1936 campaign.
strange ai behaviour maybe: ROM builds way to many CAS, CHI almost only MTN (which they didnt have IRL AFAIK). maybe also set the priority for land doctrines higher (axis minors) as GER doesnt have the blueprints for those techs?
I believe that can be considered WAD, at lest to some degree.
Thare has ben no change that would allow CHI to build Mtn. Do you mean CHC?
Sikiang could from time to time join them, but should most of time not get to much involved into war in China to early and exist a bit longer.
No guarantee of Independence then.
Right now most ships type use year = 1936 for the first 3 model. I think about reducing the first two to 1918(Great War) and 1930(Early).
Edit the minor AI's research priorities I still see Bulgaria, Iraq and others researching 'Great War Destroyer'.
Personally I think the Rom AI should just build INT and TAC for it's airforce. IMO it has little need for CAS.
Personally I think the Rom AI should just build INT and TAC for it's airforce. IMO it has little need for CAS.
At the moment i am rewriting research AI of all nations of the 1936 campaign.
Awesome! I'd advise just making the minor minor (i.e less then 10 effective IC) nations just research infantry and industry techs, and the appropriate land doctrine tree. Above that, they could also build an airforce of INT/FIG and TAC.
Maybe this suggestion would open up Pandora's box, but it would be great to see the AI producing a lot of land and/or coastal forts should it run out of manpower.
I uploaded a new set of files. New are only the tech files. I lowered some historical years below 1936. This should help some minors. It appears that the old years have not ben adapted to the fact that AoD gives up to 50% bonus for researching old techs, so this is my first attempt to change that. Since AI as to adapt to those facts it makes sense to do this first.
In reality they built mostly their own Int/fb (IAR 80 series) and light bombers. They had a small run of license-built twin-engined SM.79 (TAC) though.
Pang, would You like to check my building schemes for majors and Europe countries ? I think, they make AI armies more historical, yet not gamebraking, as i tested them. Mostly they are for 1936 base, but also for switches.
So it would make even more sense to get them to build just INT and TAC then? For me, gameplay has to come first, where the AI does what's best in the game, but it's good when it coincides with what actually happened.
I would translate light bombers into CAS. After giving territory to HUN, BUL and SOV romania has only a bit more than 20 base ic. Therefore i think that building cheap CAS makes more sence.
I donnot like to make promises and right now i am occupied otherwise. But at least giving it a look would make sense.
True, but how often would it be able to use CAS? Surely it would need to build airfields in order to fully utilise them. And TAC bombers could be used for logistical strikes and even naval/port strikes should the AI want to (and know how to) do those missions.
I understand what you mean about the AI not utilizing gearing enough. However, since the AI has no 80 day or whatever wait time before actual construction starts it means less to them. In addition, I often see a few years into the game a long line of production by the AI still producing obsolete divisions because it does not upgrade the line as a human would. Unitl we can figure out how to instruct the AI to upgrade a line in progress, I would prefer to see it unchanged.
A bit of off-topic note here -- In my own personal modding of this game, I care less about gearing because I have roughly doubled or trebled the production time of most divisions so as to make it more historic. This reduces the effect of gearing as well.