• 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.

Axe99

Ships for Victory
127 Badges
Feb 13, 2003
15.951
13.022
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
HoI4's looking tops, but it feels to me a bit like it's lacking in naval detail (and did in HoI3 as well, but HoI3's AI was never good enough to make me want to mod it), and I've been collecting (and continue to collect) some warship data for a naval mod, and thought I'd bounce some ideas off the forum. Ignore/pillory as appropriate. Obviously, a lot depends on how the final game looks, but I think we've seen enough to know that the things suggested below won't be in it.

Thoughts are:


Key things (that are hopefully fairly straightforward to do):

- Adding Frigates and Corvettes and other similar-sized escorts into the game - the reason I started down this path. Will depend a bit on how convoy raiding and escorting works as to how this'll be done.

- Improved naval tech tree. Add in levels for earlier BBs at the very least, probably ditch the 1944 BC designs (and possibly the 1940 as well, as it could be argued that by 1940 BB speeds made the concept of BCs obsolete).

- Improved accuracy of starting forces (hard to say exactly what needs doing until we get the game and can go through it, but most of the countries so far seem to be missing a few ships here and there, or have other ships that aren't representative of their actual abilities, like Germany's two Deutschland BBs).

- Adding ships to the build queue at game start - eg, the Ark Royal and the Scharnhorsts, and a bunch of smaller ships.

- If capital ship build times stay as they are, reducing them to something a dash more plausible.

- Adding in a few of other 'easy' ship classes, like anti-aircraft cruisers, monitors, torpedo boats and coastal defence ships.

- Submarine cruisers.

- Deck parking for CVs - US starts with, Japan and RN have to work for it (with it hard to achieve pre-1943).

Other things, that are more dependent on how much modding flexibility we have:

- Adding in motor launches, motor torpedo boats and motor gunboats.

- Adding in minefields and minelayers/minesweepers.

- Adding in dedicated amphibious invasion ships (as it looks like convoys are used for invasion battle plans in the base game).

- Seaplanes and seaplane tenders.

- Ships use fuel.

Pie-in-the-sky thoughts, not likely to be possible, but I can dream:

- using the framework of the division designer to create a capital (and possibly other) ship designer.

- Adding in river gunboats.

- Naval treaty systems (possibly easier than pie-in-the-sky if it's possible to limit how many variant 'pips' can be added through experience, as a proxy for tonnage limitations, or if we can make a ship designer work).

- Refitting ships (big reconstructions, like the Italian BBs).

- Decommissioning old vessels.

- Ships taking wear and tear over time.


Edit: Adding things in as they come up.
 
Last edited:
  • 18
  • 2
Reactions:

Sleight of Hand

retired modder
On Probation
14 Badges
Feb 14, 2012
12.114
5.868
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 Sign-up
This is a really good, Axe. Well done.

I was considering something similar the other day, but my artistic skills are just so piss-poor that I couldn't even come up with a decent template in Paint. I think you're right about phasing out BCs after a certain date, and I was thinking that perhaps you could have battleships and battlecruisers from say 1918 - 1936 tech, and at that point they merge into fast battleships. Think of it a bit like how medium and heavy tanks eventually merge into main battle tanks on the armor tech tree.

What do you think to that?

Having said that, I do think it's a shame we are talking about modding at such an early stage, and yet I can completely understand why. I know the game is in Beta, and I really hope we see some significant changes between now and release, but some of the tech screens just seem totally underwhelming and full of holes. Compare them with the national focus trees, which by and large are fantastic and pretty inspired.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:

Axe99

Ships for Victory
127 Badges
Feb 13, 2003
15.951
13.022
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
I was considering something similar the other day, but my artistic skills are just so piss-poor that I couldn't even come up with a decent template in Paint. I think you're right about phasing out BCs after a certain date, and I was thinking that perhaps you could have battleships and battlecruisers from say 1918 - 1936 tech, and at that point they merge into fast battleships. Think of it a bit like how medium and heavy tanks eventually merge into main battle tanks on the armor tech tree.

What do you think to that?

Cheers Sleight of Hand :). I think that's a good idea. At this stage, I'm still plugging my way through Conways getting everything into Excel as classes, and then after that expand the appropriate classes to get the names and classes of the ships that'll be there in 1936 and 1939. Conways does have scale line drawings for pretty much every class that's torpedo boat and larger, so I was hoping to scan them in and use them as templates to build tech tree pictures from. The 3D modelling I was going to leave until last, because I've got no idea what I'm doing, and I'm personally more focussed on gameplay than how it looks, but the idea would be to get models in there at some stage.

On the by, I don't think of this as 'fixing' the game - HoI4 looks like it'll be a great game without mods - but more adding detail in the naval area, something many players may not want, but some may. It's not a 'shame', any more than mods which remove sprites are a shame, but more taking a great base game and tinkering with it to meet our personal preferences :). Well, other than it's a shame that Paradox doesn't exist to serve my specific whims and interests :).
 

druebey1

First Lieutenant
26 Badges
May 21, 2012
287
48
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Supreme Ruler: Cold War
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Imperator: Rome Sign Up
  • Pride of Nations
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
IF I get HOI4 I definally be playing it with this mod :D cheers Axe.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

SchwarzKatze

Field Marshal
45 Badges
Nov 8, 2008
5.827
4.439
I was considering something similar the other day, but my artistic skills are just so piss-poor that I couldn't even come up with a decent template in Paint. I think you're right about phasing out BCs after a certain date, and I was thinking that perhaps you could have battleships and battlecruisers from say 1918 - 1936 tech, and at that point they merge into fast battleships. Think of it a bit like how medium and heavy tanks eventually merge into main battle tanks on the armor tech tree.

What do you think to that?
Fully agreed.

If nation-specific tech trees are made possible, some nations should merge them earlier than others: British N3 and G3 were still very different designs, but Japanese Amagi and Kii were different only by 38mm of belt armor and 0.25 knots.

And the fast battleship lineage could possibly be split further down the line during the game's timeframe, with large battleships and large cruisers branching out.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Antediluvian Monster

Gleiwitz/Mainila/Russia
3 Badges
Dec 7, 2015
2.312
2.247
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris Sign-up
IMO, the four tier naval tech tree is we have seen for vanilla is usable, but the 1940 naval tech is superfluous and should be reused for earlier tech. Something like this:

OHpJnKh.jpg

1918 tech represent pre-WW1 designs as base variant, WW1 designs as upgraded variant. 1922 represent post-war designs as base, up to mid '30s as upgraded. 1937 is pre-war and wartime designs and 1944 is a future tech, representing the kinds of ships that did not historically make any impact on WW2. AC is intended as catch all for pre-dreadnought battleships, armoured cruisers and coastal battleships, while CB represents "new" super-cruisers like Alaska.
 
Last edited:
  • 3
Reactions:

jcd000

First Lieutenant
6 Badges
Jun 29, 2015
215
235
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • BATTLETECH
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
IMO, the four tier naval tech tree is we have seen for vanilla is usable, but the 1940 naval tech is superfluous and should be reused for earlier tech. Something like this:

OHpJnKh.jpg


1918 tech represent pre-WW1 designs as base variant, WW1 designs as upgraded variant. 1922 represent post-war designs as base, up to mid '30s as upgraded. 1937 is pre-war and wartime designs and 1944 is a future tech, representing the kinds of ships that did not historically make any impact on WW2. AC is intended as catch all for pre-dreadnought battleships, armoured cruisers and coastal battleships, while CB represents "new" super-cruisers like Alaska.

I like it. It is elegant ;)
Add some more classes like axe said, for example MTB's, Corvettes, AMC's, Coastal defence ships, maybe CVE's too, and it is more or less done.
Of course, this way most players will only build 1937 and 1937+ (upgraded) designs, so i'd argue the need for an additional 1940 tech.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Antediluvian Monster

Gleiwitz/Mainila/Russia
3 Badges
Dec 7, 2015
2.312
2.247
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris Sign-up
Of course, this way most players will only build 1937 and 1937+ (upgraded) designs, so i'd argue the need for an additional 1940 tech.

That is essentially what historically happened during wartime. They stuck with basic dependable designs using proven technology. Teething troubles in existing technology were ironed out and ancillary technology and equipment like light AA, radar, command and control facilities were upgraded and modified but the base technology of the ships themselves remained similar during wartime to immediate pre-war.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:

jcd000

First Lieutenant
6 Badges
Jun 29, 2015
215
235
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • BATTLETECH
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
That is essentially what historically happened during wartime. They stuck with basic dependable designs using proven technology. Teething troubles in existing technology were ironed out to and ancillary technology and equipment like light AA, radar, command and control facilities were upgraded and modified but the base technology of the ships themselves remained similar during wartime to pre-war.
I can agree to that, provided that the upgrade system is robust enough to represent 7yrs of wartime upgrading.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Sleight of Hand

retired modder
On Probation
14 Badges
Feb 14, 2012
12.114
5.868
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 Sign-up
@Antediluvian Monster

I think your naval tech tree is fantastic and a definitive improvement over what we have now; all I'd add is BB-4 tech, which would perhaps be required for SHBB-2 tech. If people want to push out advanced, late-war BBs then they should be able to; built early, they have plenty of time to have an impact by 1948/9.

Aside from that, I love it.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Antediluvian Monster

Gleiwitz/Mainila/Russia
3 Badges
Dec 7, 2015
2.312
2.247
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris Sign-up
@Antediluvian Monster
I think your naval tech tree is fantastic and a definitive improvement over what we have now; all I'd add is BB-4 tech, which would perhaps be required for SHBB-2 tech. If people want to push out advanced, late-war BBs then they should be able to; built early, they have plenty of time to have an impact by 1948/9.

The reason I left BB-4 out was because SHBB-1 already represents logical successor to BB-3. Ultimately, if you want to build a more capable vessel than, say, Iowa (which would be advanced variant of BB-3 in my techs) you would need to make a bigger ship. BB-4 would end up being virtual replication of SHBB-1 at strange research date.

That being said, the SHBB-1* should be locked somehow until you leave the naval treaty system, and hence get the political right to build bigger ships. For democracies such choice should be limited somehow to prevent abuse but Facists should be able be do so at any time at the cost of increasing world tensions, as Japan did historically by not signing the 2nd London treaty which replaced the Washington treaty starting 1937.

*This should probably apply to CA-2 and CV-2 as well.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

mdw1985

Colonel
54 Badges
Feb 7, 2011
1.056
1.827
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Darkest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Prison Architect
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Stellaris
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • BATTLETECH
HoI4's looking tops, but it feels to me a bit like it's lacking in naval detail (and did in HoI3 as well, but HoI3's AI was never good enough to make me want to mod it), and I've been collecting (and continue to collect) some warship data for a naval mod, and thought I'd bounce some ideas off the forum. Ignore/pillory as appropriate. Obviously, a lot depends on how the final game looks, but I think we've seen enough to know that the things suggested below won't be in it.

Thoughts are:


Key things (that are hopefully fairly straightforward to do):

- Adding Frigates and Corvettes and other similar-sized escorts into the game - the reason I started down this path. Will depend a bit on how convoy raiding and escorting works as to how this'll be done.

- Improved naval tech tree. Add in levels for earlier BBs at the very least, probably ditch the 1944 BC designs (and possibly the 1940 as well, as it could be argued that by 1940 BB speeds made the concept of BCs obsolete).

- Improved accuracy of starting forces (hard to say exactly what needs doing until we get the game and can go through it, but most of the countries so far seem to be missing a few ships here and there, or have other ships that aren't representative of their actual abilities, like Germany's two Deutschland BBs).

- Adding ships to the build queue at game start - eg, the Ark Royal and the Scharnhorsts, and a bunch of smaller ships.

- If capital ship build times stay as they are, reducing them to something a dash more plausible.

- Adding in a few of other 'easy' ship classes, like anti-aircraft cruisers, monitors, torpedo boats and coastal defence ships.


Other things, that are more dependent on how much modding flexibility we have:

- Adding in motor launches, motor torpedo boats and motor gunboats.

- Adding in minefields and minelayers/minesweepers.


Pie-in-the-sky thoughts, not likely to be possible, but I can dream:

- using the framework of the division designer to create a capital (and possibly other) ship designer.

- Adding in river gunboats.

+1!!!
 

Axe99

Ships for Victory
127 Badges
Feb 13, 2003
15.951
13.022
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
My memory's a bit dodgy - added some more things to my 'wishlist', all on the less probable side of things, but you never know :). Cheers to Antediluvian monster for his mention of the treaty system, wouldn't have remembered it for this without that.

- Naval treaty systems (possibly easier than pie-in-the-sky if it's possible to limit how many variant 'pips' can be added through experience, as a proxy for tonnage limitations, or if we can make a ship designer work).

- Refitting ships (big reconstructions, like the Italian BBs).

- Decommissioning old vessels.


IMO, the four tier naval tech tree is we have seen for vanilla is usable, but the 1940 naval tech is superfluous and should be reused for earlier tech. Something like this:

OHpJnKh.jpg

1918 tech represent pre-WW1 designs as base variant, WW1 designs as upgraded variant. 1922 represent post-war designs as base, up to mid '30s as upgraded. 1937 is pre-war and wartime designs and 1944 is a future tech, representing the kinds of ships that did not historically make any impact on WW2. AC is intended as catch all for pre-dreadnought battleships, armoured cruisers and coastal battleships, while CB represents "new" super-cruisers like Alaska.

I like what you've put together there :). I'm holding off on going too far into tech trees at the moment, as we don't really know what the differences between each level on the tech tree are, in terms of capability (so, for example, one 1918 level may work fine, or we might need 2-3 to get the range of capability those models represented over that period), although I know what ship types we want to cover off (Pre-dreadnoughts, Dreadnoughts, WW1 BBs designed pre-Jutland, Coastal Defence Ships, ACs, a handful of early scout cruisers).

On the 1918 level, what would your thoughts be on having it at 1915, giving a clean break between Pre and Post-Jutland designs?

I was probably going to have a pre-Dreadnought BB tier and the AC as the first tier of the CA line (probably at a similar time period) just to keep things simple, at a 1900 or so column of the tech tree, with CAs skipping 1918. There were one or two very early CLs still floating around in 1936-48, so was probably going to have a CL1 in 1900 as well, as I think we'll need something to represent the pre-dreadnought era for the larger ships (I can't see any need for a pre-WW1 DD or SS tier, or anything smaller).

I was also going to have a separate line for coastal defence ships (particularly if it's possible to give that class a bonus in coastal waters, but also because they weren't quite the same as ACs, particularly the later models - deffo a 1900 and 1918/15 tier, and maybe a later one, depending on how different the Illmarinen looks to the Sverige class) and monitors (probably just two points, 1915 and 1937)

Aircraft carriers are another tricky one, as there was a substantial difference between the armoured UK CVs with lower aircraft (and aviation fuel) capacity and the lighter armoured but larger air wings of the American CVs, and then there's the somewhat large (for a CV) armour of some of the 'conversion' CVs. CVEs are also going to get a run, but they should be a bit more straightforward. I want to see how the variant system works in practice before deciding either way how to go about this (for example, it may be easy as we like to have base CV stats and use experience to get the models that were used historically, or we might want a couple of different CV lines - I'm hoping the former).

In terms of how things'll look, I'm more of a substance over style person, but at the very least I can photoshop line drawings to get the below (sorry about the horrible 'smudging' of the vanilla image, was tired and don't think there'll be a need for a proper process for it):

Crown Colony Class Cruiser mock-up.jpg


If I can find a way of doing it easily, I'll try and get some of the nice shadings that give the ships a bit more character, but it's not a priority.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Sleight of Hand

retired modder
On Probation
14 Badges
Feb 14, 2012
12.114
5.868
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 Sign-up
As per your original goals, I would think - or at least hope - that major historical vessels should be in build queues at release. I believe this was the case in previous games, and as there are only two scenarios and a handful of countries that actually built warships, this really shouldn't be too difficult.
 

Axe99

Ships for Victory
127 Badges
Feb 13, 2003
15.951
13.022
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Stellaris: Lithoids
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Crusader Kings III: Royal Edition
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Stellaris: Necroids
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Victoria 3 Sign Up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For The Glory
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • The Kings Crusade
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Pride of Nations
  • Rise of Prussia
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
As per your original goals, I would think - or at least hope - that major historical vessels should be in build queues at release. I believe this was the case in previous games, and as there are only two scenarios and a handful of countries that actually built warships, this really shouldn't be too difficult.

Absolutely, I'm a big fan of this. It seems a bit odd in the World War Wednesday for neither Britain or Germany to have anything on the go (although this might just be because it's a work-in-progress build - this is why I'm focussing what I'm doing at the moment on getting data for the smaller ships, which definitely won't be in, and on tech tree images, although I'm still mostly all data at the moment).

Speaking of tech tree images, do people have any favourite classes for the 1922 and 1937/6 (if we go with Antediluvian's approach, which I think has a lot of potential depending on how the variant scheme works out) CLs, DDS and BBs? It looks like the art is the same for each tech tree, and while it's just line drawings filled in with grey, I'm keen to get the actual classes in there.
 

SchwarzKatze

Field Marshal
45 Badges
Nov 8, 2008
5.827
4.439
IMO, the four tier naval tech tree is we have seen for vanilla is usable, but the 1940 naval tech is superfluous and should be reused for earlier tech. Something like this:

OHpJnKh.jpg

1918 tech represent pre-WW1 designs as base variant, WW1 designs as upgraded variant. 1922 represent post-war designs as base, up to mid '30s as upgraded. 1937 is pre-war and wartime designs and 1944 is a future tech, representing the kinds of ships that did not historically make any impact on WW2. AC is intended as catch all for pre-dreadnought battleships, armoured cruisers and coastal battleships, while CB represents "new" super-cruisers like Alaska.
If multi-derivation is possible, I'd like to see BB-3 being derived from both BB-2 and BC-2 to represent the merger of slow battleships and battlecruisers, and CB-1 being derived from CA-2, BC-2, or even BB-3 to represent US (Alaska was scaled up from Baltimore), Japanese (B-65 was meant to fill in Kongōs' former role) and alternate possibility of being a "pocket fast battleship".

And at least for CL and DD, 1940 technology should be preserved as those did served for most of the war.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Amur_Tiger

Captain
71 Badges
Aug 23, 2009
308
386
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Cities in Motion
  • 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: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • War of the Roses
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
My memory's a bit dodgy - added some more things to my 'wishlist', all on the less probable side of things, but you never know :). Cheers to Antediluvian monster for his mention of the treaty system, wouldn't have remembered it for this without that.

- Naval treaty systems (possibly easier than pie-in-the-sky if it's possible to limit how many variant 'pips' can be added through experience, as a proxy for tonnage limitations, or if we can make a ship designer work).

- Refitting ships (big reconstructions, like the Italian BBs).

- Decommissioning old vessels.




I like what you've put together there :). I'm holding off on going too far into tech trees at the moment, as we don't really know what the differences between each level on the tech tree are, in terms of capability (so, for example, one 1918 level may work fine, or we might need 2-3 to get the range of capability those models represented over that period), although I know what ship types we want to cover off (Pre-dreadnoughts, Dreadnoughts, WW1 BBs designed pre-Jutland, Coastal Defence Ships, ACs, a handful of early scout cruisers).

On the 1918 level, what would your thoughts be on having it at 1915, giving a clean break between Pre and Post-Jutland designs?

I was probably going to have a pre-Dreadnought BB tier and the AC as the first tier of the CA line (probably at a similar time period) just to keep things simple, at a 1900 or so column of the tech tree, with CAs skipping 1918. There were one or two very early CLs still floating around in 1936-48, so was probably going to have a CL1 in 1900 as well, as I think we'll need something to represent the pre-dreadnought era for the larger ships (I can't see any need for a pre-WW1 DD or SS tier, or anything smaller).

I was also going to have a separate line for coastal defence ships (particularly if it's possible to give that class a bonus in coastal waters, but also because they weren't quite the same as ACs, particularly the later models - deffo a 1900 and 1918/15 tier, and maybe a later one, depending on how different the Illmarinen looks to the Sverige class) and monitors (probably just two points, 1915 and 1937)

Aircraft carriers are another tricky one, as there was a substantial difference between the armoured UK CVs with lower aircraft (and aviation fuel) capacity and the lighter armoured but larger air wings of the American CVs, and then there's the somewhat large (for a CV) armour of some of the 'conversion' CVs. CVEs are also going to get a run, but they should be a bit more straightforward. I want to see how the variant system works in practice before deciding either way how to go about this (for example, it may be easy as we like to have base CV stats and use experience to get the models that were used historically, or we might want a couple of different CV lines - I'm hoping the former).

In terms of how things'll look, I'm more of a substance over style person, but at the very least I can photoshop line drawings to get the below (sorry about the horrible 'smudging' of the vanilla image, was tired and don't think there'll be a need for a proper process for it):

View attachment 147033

If I can find a way of doing it easily, I'll try and get some of the nice shadings that give the ships a bit more character, but it's not a priority.

As you can no doubt guess based off our interactions in other threads I'm in full support of this though I'll re-iterate some of my ideas here for convenience.

Dreadnoughts as you describe them splits off into Super-Dreads and Battlecruisers
New Yorks and Nevadas would fit here due to firepower and speed deficiencies.

Super Dreadnoughts ( tier 2 )
Defining features, notable improvements in speed, firepower and combat range but a fair bit more expensive
Queen E defines this class, Ise, the Pennsylvania to Tennessee classes fit here nicely

WWI Battlecruiser ( tier 2 )
Defining features, very fast, lots of firepower, poorly protected
Kongo, 'Splended cats', Hood

Washington Treaty Battleships ( tier 3 )
Defining features much improved vertical protection, mild improvements elsewhere, mild cost increase
Nelsons, Colorados, Nagatos

Washington Treaty Battlecruisers ( tier 3 )
Defining feature, notably better protection, notably expensive
Hood if it got the deck armor promised

Fast battleship 1934 ( tier 4, unifies battlecruisers and battleships into a single tree )
Defining feature, much more speed, mild improvements to firepower and armor, AA firepower can start to be powerful here without refits.
KGV, Bismark

Fast battleship 1939 ( tier 5 )
Defining feature, mild improvements in all main categories, AA firepower is much improved, somewhat more expensive.
SoDak, North Carolinas, Lion class, Iowas would be an improved variant ( as they were essentially stretched SoDaks )

Heavy Battleship 1939 ( tier 5)
Defining features, large improvements in firepower and armor, AA firepower is much improved much more expensive
Yamato ( while they didn't have the AA firepower it's hard to imagine poor AA as being a defining feature of this type of ship so much as being due to the issues with Japanese AA )

The ships that you list that I omit aren't meant to be excluded simply moved with their peers into appropriate categories, the ships mentioned are either emblematic of the type of ship or ships that are hard to categorize that have to be interpreted into one type or another ( standard battleships mainly ).

One of the notable aspects here would be a lack of late war tech for battleships which in my opinion is appropriate, there weren't any major improvements to battleship design to happen at this point so I don't think that adding superfluous tech levels makes a lot of sense. Carriers would be different given their comparatively rapid evolution, though I'd still shy away from any tech level less then two years before the end of game.

On to separation of classes and tech levels though.

I think pre and post Jutland end up roughly being the same as the Washington treaty as the immediate post Jutland ships didn't incorporate the lessons, it took some time for things to sink into the design establishment. However 1912 is a good break point as marking the start of the 'super dreadnoughts' which were less a response to Jutland and more of a refinement of the concept of a battleship with centerline superfiring turrets, oil fired boilers and the kick up to 15" guns.

Carriers are unsurprisingly complicated given the lack of consensus in what design practices to follow, I really am hoping that the variants system will provide a lot of leeway but it's a pretty big question mark. One thing that I would like to emphasize that if we ever feel a need to extend the tree to supercarriers and we have seperate armored and unarmored carrier lines then the supercarrier should require both lines be researched as they incorperated design principals from armored carriers while using a larger hull to retain the advantages of the unarmored carrier. Beyond the Armored/Unarmored debate there's also the CV/CVL/CVE spectrum, all of which was well populated in examples but also seem fairly silly to break down into their own individual techs.

One way of handling it could be having just the one central carrier tech but allowing you access to different flavors of carrier depending on your other naval techs.

CV1 ~1916
Grants access to CVE essentially ( unless there's actually a civilian ship related tech to tie this in with ) ex HMS Argus
+ BB1 tech grants access to a CVL ex HMS Eagle

CV2 ~1918
Grants access to CVE ex HMS Hermes
+ BC2 tech grants access to CVL ex HMS Furious

CV3~1924
Grants access to CVE ex none
Grants access to CVL ex IJN Ryūjō
+BC3 tech grants access to CV ex USN Lexington, IJN Kaga

CV4~1934
Grants access to CVE ex none
Grants access to CVL ex USS Ranger, IJN Sōryū
+BC3 tech Grants access to CV ex HMS Arc Royal, USS Yorktown
CVA ( armored carrier ) Perhaps linked to some advancement in AA? ex HMS Illustrious

CV5~1940
Grants access to CVE ex HMS Avenger
Grants access to CVL ex HMS Colossus,
Grants access to CV ex USS Essex, HMS Audacious, IJN Shōkaku
CVA IJN Taiho

CV6 ~1943
Grants access to CVE ex HMS Avenger
Grants access to CVL ex USS Saipan,
Grants access to CV ex USS Midway, HMS Malta

I'm inclined to say that CV5 and up should require some basic 'big fast ship' building experience in the form of BC2 tech or BB 4 tech, here's a quote about the Yorktown that illustrates the importance of the conversions in the push towards larger and ultimately more effective carriers. The USS Ranger I believe was a more natural evolution of the purpose-built carriers of the time that without the exposure to the BC conversions would have likely represented US efforts for the time. By 1940 it was clear that the larger carriers were the superior model but this represents something of a revolution that required the experience with the BC conversions and successors to really cement in place.

Both USS Ranger and USS Wasp further showed the limitations of sub-20,000 ton designs. USS Ranger proved to be unable to sustain rougher weather in the Pacific while lack of virtually any protective features soon relegated her to a training ship. USS Wasp's lack of torpedo protection contributed to her loss in the Pacific theater. The lessons learned from operations with the large converted battlecruiser Lexington class in comparison with the smaller purpose-built Ranger had taught the Navy that large carriers were more flexible in operational terms and were more survivable than smaller ones.

The USS Ranger I believe was a more natural evolution of the purpose-built carriers of the time that without the exposure to the BC conversions would have likely represented US efforts for the time. By 1940 it was clear that the larger carriers were the superior model but this represents something of a revolution that required the experience with the BC conversions and successors to really cement in place.

I'm still not entirely sure what to do with the armored carriers, they're such oddball things as they aren't easily separated by displacement but from a technological point of view they had few unique requirements compared to a more standard carrier, save for a particularly effective AA setup.
 
  • 2
Reactions:

Enfield303

Corporal
81 Badges
Feb 5, 2014
41
209
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Cities in Motion
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Magicka 2
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II
  • 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
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • War of the Roses
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Magicka: Wizard Wars Founder Wizard
Having said that, I do think it's a shame we are talking about modding at such an early stage, and yet I can completely understand why. I know the game is in Beta, and I really hope we see some significant changes between now and release, but some of the tech screens just seem totally underwhelming and full of holes. Compare them with the national focus trees, which by and large are fantastic and pretty inspired.

Eh I'm not surprised. Priority has to go somewhere (Read, the primary game mechanics) and as far as the "GAME" part of HOI4 is concerned the different icons and variants are just upgrades with different flavour text per nation. Plenty of room to expand upon them later.

Temper your expectations though, they are submitting Beta candidates, don't expect too much to change.

Some neat stuff here though!
 
  • 2
Reactions:

Amur_Tiger

Captain
71 Badges
Aug 23, 2009
308
386
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Magicka
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Stellaris
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Cities in Motion
  • 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: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • War of the Roses
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
Eh I'm not surprised. Priority has to go somewhere (Read, the primary game mechanics) and as far as the "GAME" part of HOI4 is concerned the different icons and variants are just upgrades with different flavour text per nation. Plenty of room to expand upon them later.

Temper your expectations though, they are submitting Beta candidates, don't expect too much to change.

Some neat stuff here though!

Yeah, and frankly this is a good thing. Given that the primary game mechanics always have to work and one of them is depending on some fairly novel player-AI interactions I wouldn't want much effort to be spent on things like this when those core things have to hit it out of the park. I suspect that it's in part in this spirit that this thread was started, while much ink has been spilled over the potential pitfalls in the naval game I don't think many are so disappointed that they're even concerned about the value of the game as a whole, there's other more important things to focus on. For players though we can speculate and plan how we'd like to change things when we get our grubby hands on the game. :)
 
  • 1
Reactions: