• 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.

unmerged(15262)

First Lieutenant
Mar 3, 2003
235
0
Visit site
Loki134 said:
the precise definition of the type varies by country, typically having a capacity of 1/2 to 2/3 of the aircraft of a full-sized carrier. this says wiki as a definition to a CVL . i think this includes displacment , aircraft and so on . i think you have to decide from carrier to carrier , but we need some range like :

perhaps in 1938 :
CVL: 10 to 36 aircraft
CV: 37 or more aircraft

1944
CVL: 20 to 49 aircraft
CV: 50 or more aircraft

?!?!

That is a good idear I would up the 1938 numbers 24-36 planes only because the CVE. its a guestion of simple or details armourded decks, wood decks, conversion carriers, early carriers HMS Eagle, 21 planes HMS Hermes, 15 planes HMS Furious 36 planes IJN Hosho 21 planes but as planes got larger only 11 planes, all were concidered CV: When folded winged aircraft came in to the RN carrier groups got bigger Illustrious class went 36 to 54 planes. The IJN made many conversion carriers to get around Washington Tready of 1922. Panther G referance earlier INJ Ryujo displaced 8,000 tons, 48 planes, a CV: IJN Shokaku class which both came out before WWII was the best carriers [game doesn't reflect that]till Essex's class came out in 1943. Will CVE ever be put in came something to consider down the road. Like I said simple or details.
 

unmerged(12544)

General
Dec 9, 2002
1.936
0
Visit site
Paradox calls the new unit "escort carrier" as type and the units stats suggest, that they don't mean light carrier, but escort carriers. I will try to include all suggestions made here in those alternatives:

1) No CVE, Light carrier instead, aircraft: 24-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60 for e.g. Illustrious and displacement)

2) CVE with Light carriers, Light carriers also in carriers, aircraft: 10-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60)

How about that?
 
Last edited:

rook749

Captain
25 Badges
Jul 4, 2003
447
0
twitter.com
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Stellaris
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • 500k Club
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • East India Company
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
Panther,

I'd lean toward Option # 1.

Would it be possible to have five models of CVE's and 5 Models of CVL's? The CVE's would have far lower stats then the CLV's (due to less planes). Or is it not possible to break the ten models for the escort carries up like this?

Rook


Panther G said:
Paradox calls the new unit "escort carrier" as type and the units stats suggest, that they don't mean light carrier, but escort carriers. I will try to include all suggestions made here in those alternatives:

1) No CVE, Light carrier instead, aircraft: 24-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60 for e.g. Illustrious and displacement)

2) CVE with Light carriers, Light carriers also in carriers, aircraft: 10-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60)

How about that?
 

unmerged(12544)

General
Dec 9, 2002
1.936
0
Visit site
rook749 said:
I'd lean toward Option # 1.

Would it be possible to have five models of CVE's and 5 Models of CVL's? The CVE's would have far lower stats then the CLV's (due to less planes). Or is it not possible to break the ten models for the escort carries up like this?
Possible, but we would have to sacrifice one model and then CVE/CVL would be no longer parallel to CV in terms of models.

v0.50 is out (Doomsday)
 
Last edited:

unmerged(37417)

Second Lieutenant
Jan 3, 2005
158
0
www.UltimateWisdom.de
Panther G said:
Paradox calls the new unit "escort carrier" as type and the units stats suggest, that they don't mean light carrier, but escort carriers. I will try to include all suggestions made here in those alternatives:

1) No CVE, Light carrier instead, aircraft: 24-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60 for e.g. Illustrious and displacement)

2) CVE with Light carriers, Light carriers also in carriers, aircraft: 10-49 and >=50 (with room for flexibility around 36-60)

How about that?

An idea comes to my mind .. would it be possible to convert the new DD "escort carrier" to real light carriers by adding new "Light CAG" brigades which can be attached to CVL's and CV's, and converting the existing CAG to "Heavy CAG" which can only be attached to the big carriers?
So you could essentially model both the ships themselves as well as their smaller aigroups.
 

unmerged(12544)

General
Dec 9, 2002
1.936
0
Visit site
Heimdall.de said:
An idea comes to my mind .. would it be possible to convert the new DD "escort carrier" to real light carriers by adding new "Light CAG" brigades which can be attached to CVL's and CV's, and converting the existing CAG to "Heavy CAG" which can only be attached to the big carriers?
So you could essentially model both the ships themselves as well as their smaller aigroups.
Possible, but not so easy to realize. We have no free brigade and the question is, is the improvement worth the effort. For detail it would be best to have CVE,CVL and CV, but you have to simplify the whole thing to some degree.
Zakouski said:
Could you give some details on what you've done to DD ??
DD improvements were incorporated into HIP or in other words the old HIP with those new DD features.
 

unmerged(12544)

General
Dec 9, 2002
1.936
0
Visit site
Oh, forget about v0.49. Should just mean, that if there is something like that, then install/unpack first. Below the "Doomsday" folder there will always be everything you need (all necessary files) for HIP.

Instructions on the first page are updated. This is for the next version (there is no v0.51, yet), but can also be used for 0.50.

Sorry for the incomplete tech backgrounds, we will provide finished ones, when Keldor finds the time.
 
Last edited:

unmerged(29718)

Second Lieutenant
May 27, 2004
158
0
panther , in the 1936-scenario all ships of germany , which are in development will be finished in 1936 ! in the germany.inc is no mistake , so i don´t know where is the bug . does anybody has the same bug ?!
 

unmerged(49775)

Sergeant
Oct 26, 2005
70
0
What the hell? The naval thingy file doesn't work, it makes the game crash to desktop(yes I extracted it fine)... and the game took more than 20mins to load without it so I shut the application... now I am going to have to try again and find something else to do for a damn hour.

Fix this. :(
(DD version).
 

unmerged(12544)

General
Dec 9, 2002
1.936
0
Visit site
Loki134 said:
panther , in the 1936-scenario all ships of germany , which are in development will be finished in 1936 ! in the germany.inc is no mistake , so i don´t know where is the bug . does anybody has the same bug ?!
The dates in game are not equal to the *.inc file. All Paradox 1936 scenario developements seem to be finished in 1936 :confused: The game transforms the *.inc dates in a strange way, might be a Paradox bug. In the 1942 campaign, all dates, except the last one are working for USA.
kabex said:
What the hell? The naval thingy file doesn't work, it makes the game crash to desktop(yes I extracted it fine)... and the game took more than 20mins to load without it so I shut the application... now I am going to have to try again and find something else to do for a damn hour.

Fix this. :(
(DD version).
I will upload the latest file again. You have put it to the right folder (...\Doomsday HIP\map\)?
kabex said:
D'oh, doesn't work with DD 1.0... WHY oh why would you port it to 1.1? It's crap. Leader exp is complete bs, airplane exp is complete bs, purchasing blueprints/divisions is complete bs(impossible) etc. :(
HIP will usually be for the latest patch and exp gain still uses HIP values and NOT DD ones.
 
Last edited: