-
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.
massive fan of the mod, been playing it and doing an AAR on it for a good long time now.
Any outlook on what the next course for the mod is or any ambitions for it?
Any outlook on what the next course for the mod is or any ambitions for it?
The slow speeds appear to be caused by a duplication of movement penalties, as discussed a few posts ago. I'm attaching unofficial "fixed" versions of the files affected.
place in ....mods/New World Order 2/db/tech
Be warned, however, I haven't tested much after making these changes as I'm starting my first playthrough after making this change myself. I have only confirmed that divisions in 1933 return to speeds normal for Darkest Hour. You'll probably want to keep a backup of these files.
Thank you I often modded DH and co. a long time ago but wasn't able to find the source of this bug.
Just a suggestion the Iranian part of Kurdistan (Republic of Mahabad) should only consist of Kermanshah not Tabriz and Rezaiye. Tabriz and Rezaiye should be Azerbaijan People's Republic
Is there any way for the Hungarian revolution to succeed? I was playing as Hungry for just this reason but instead of geting the choice to at least declare on the Soviets, i get an auto failure event. Which is totally killing my plans in my current game.
This fixed the problem.
I found another issue with some of the events. If i manage to invade the british isles before japan attacks the allies. The isolationist british are pulled into the war again. Also, for some reason Italy declares war on Britain some years after it surrendered and im at war with it again. Not fun.
Japan declaring war on the UK is caused by the Pearl Harbour event. And you can argue both ways: would Japan really refrain from declaring war if they thought the time was right or would they (rather more likely) grab what they want and can (like Hong Kong) while the British are distracted by Germany running rampant on the British Isles.
Italy declares war, because a weak England is a juicy target - basically a leftover of Europa Universalis 2, where such a AI behaviour made sense. In HoI II and AoD or DH it's less sensible, but sadly still present. The AI in these games is not that great and AI countries at times act completely insanely or in a historically implausible fashion.
It's the same about Hungary: there is no way the Hungarians could have won against the Red Army in real life in the long run. As a decent player against the AI, victory is possible. Therefore the game is railroaded at times for historical plausability. Just think of National China (Encirclement Campaigns I'm looking at you) or Chernobyl for the USSR.
Italy declares war, because a weak England is a juicy target - basically a leftover of Europa Universalis 2, where such a AI behaviour made sense. In HoI II and AoD or DH it's less sensible, but sadly still present. The AI in these games is not that great and AI countries at times act completely insanely or in a historically implausible fashion.
It's the same about Hungary: there is no way the Hungarians could have won against the Red Army in real life in the long run. As a decent player against the AI, victory is possible. Therefore the game is railroaded at times for historical plausability. Just think of National China (Encirclement Campaigns I'm looking at you) or Chernobyl for the USSR.
Thanks for this. I'll be releasing a 2.2.8 patch-version shortly; before the next major version so that those things are fixed.
Last edited:
1970s scenario, either an early-decade one under 'Nixon in China' working title or a late-decade one (no title idea) which might be a bit more interesting due to proximity of conflicts in Afghanistan, Iran/Iraq, the Falklands. And 1985 'Winds of Change' scenario - no slightest doubt here.
And I'll squeeze Democratic Yemen in.
Yeah, there shouldn't be any viable chance of Hungary, Czechoslovakia or Poland (which all get somewhat similar 'Soviet pressure' events) winning in open field. I quickly checked that the events don't suggest otherwise and the only way for the revolution to succeed is for USSR to give up the subject. The intention to solve things in forceful way was never unanimous in Soviet circles so it is imaginable that some leniency towards reforms could exist. However, in the mod it's now always about pressing for full-fledged and far-fetched independence so it's quite impossible for the Soviet doves to get upper hand (chance of around 2%).
It would be good to revise ai_chances, dissent hits, external pressure (Hungary already lands in the UN agenda) and wordings here or there but quite possibly the current premise that >>revolution only succeeds if USSR lets it succeed<< will remain.
1970s scenario, either an early-decade one under 'Nixon in China' working title or a late-decade one (no title idea) which might be a bit more interesting due to proximity of conflicts in Afghanistan, Iran/Iraq, the Falklands. And 1985 'Winds of Change' scenario - no slightest doubt here.
And I'll squeeze Democratic Yemen in.
awesome, saucesome.
I have noticed that by around 65 ministers and generals really start to tail off.
Any ideas to change the economic system or expand the space race or map overhaul?
Thanks for this mod, I am having a blast rocking around as the USSR in my AAR or the UK in another game
1970s scenario, either an early-decade one under 'Nixon in China' working title or a late-decade one (no title idea) which might be a bit more interesting due to proximity of conflicts in Afghanistan, Iran/Iraq, the Falklands. And 1985 'Winds of Change' scenario - no slightest doubt here.
And I'll squeeze Democratic Yemen in.
Yeah, there shouldn't be any viable chance of Hungary, Czechoslovakia or Poland (which all get somewhat similar 'Soviet pressure' events) winning in open field. I quickly checked that the events don't suggest otherwise and the only way for the revolution to succeed is for USSR to give up the subject. The intention to solve things in forceful way was never unanimous in Soviet circles so it is imaginable that some leniency towards reforms could exist. However, in the mod it's now always about pressing for full-fledged and far-fetched independence so it's quite impossible for the Soviet doves to get upper hand (chance of around 2%).
It would be good to revise ai_chances, dissent hits, external pressure (Hungary already lands in the UN agenda) and wordings here or there but quite possibly the current premise that >>revolution only succeeds if USSR lets it succeed<< will remain.
Great, could you squeeze Burundi in? I think it even was there in NWO 1, and it already has a tag, I think.
1970's scenario? Awesome, I've just started scraping up some ministers for the USA post-1963; seems like you could use some of my work after I've done. I also planned some alternate U.S. presidential elections (such as a Nixon/Lodge vs. Symington/Humphrey in '64 if Nixon wins in '60), them being a feature of the original game and all.
An era between 30s and 70s had oficial historical name-era of dictatorships.So,you can call 1970 Scenario as Sunset of dictatorships or twilight of dictatorships
It's amazing that maps.ederon.net is still working so you can see that it wasn't even on the map (there was just Kigali).
But yeah, yeah, probably too...Sure, great. There's been particular interest in US elections as I remember so that would be great.
Was it particular trait of the 70s? Sure, Spain and Portugal are two biggies here, but overall there wasn't any great surge, I somehow remember this graph (which might better work if it showed free/unfree ratio rather than absolute number of countries):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polit...03_scoring_8_or_higher_on_Polity_IV_scale.png
But for now, there's nothing breathtaking about Nixon's mission in China in NWO so I'm not bent on this idea completely
If you're doing the 70s era onwards, I can help you with events for the Troubles as well as ministers for Ireland and Northern Ireland.
One thing you could do to better simulate wars of de-colonization (say, if the British refuse to leave India) would be to have each of the colonies be puppets and have the puppets go to war with the breakaway rebels, while giving the mother country and other major powers ability to intervene via decisions and events (but to keep the AI from out rightly going to war with the breakaway state, which would lead to, as you say, all-out and often nuclear warfare).
I just mention this because holding the British Empire together in the game is (with a few exceptions, like in Israel/Palestine where the dissent gain is extraordinarily large) very easy, and it shouldn't be. Repeated Civil Wars, insurgencies, and outside intervention should eventually kick the British out of Malaysia, India, Africa, and other places.
I just mention this because holding the British Empire together in the game is (with a few exceptions, like in Israel/Palestine where the dissent gain is extraordinarily large) very easy, and it shouldn't be. Repeated Civil Wars, insurgencies, and outside intervention should eventually kick the British out of Malaysia, India, Africa, and other places.
- 1
Question - I am playing as Canada, it is 1947 and I have one nuclear weapon (my first) and I loaded it on a plane (1943 STR bomber). but I can not figure out how to drop it? Do I need a more advanced bomber? do I need to take off the escort fighter?
EDIT - ignore, I just found the nuke decision.
EDIT - ignore, I just found the nuke decision.
Last edited:
Could you also have events for Bangaldesh, since they do get independent after 1971, but don't have any events?
