Patch 1.4 - Technology

[RoboCzar]

Sine you're leaving it to the AI, which already drops your efficiency in the lavatory and flushes it, what do you care about a few more percent loss?

Because it's basically effective when holding the line, and the AI isn't nearly as bad as people claim it is when presented with a clearly defined front with correctly set objectives?

The AI does a fine job in controlled circumstances, like when fighting in Russia and Asia, and its effectiveness, when given the correct generals at the correct levels of command is astounding. THAT is why radio range is important. The supply usage bonus (at, I believe, Army Group level) alone is worth it to me, and having half your units without that bonus can be a major draw on your supply network and hobble an offensive if infrastructure is poor.

 

[Cpl Wilding]

Just a little nit-picking, but I believe under Coal-to-Power (not sure on this, I'll have to check) instead of "chemical engineering" the text states "chamical engineering".

 

[menasure]

sweet! i just love the mentioning of starting tech adaptations for minors/mediums, i hope you get them all to a historical level

 

[warchlak]

Is there ANY way to increase radio range then? What about a new tech or two to do it? Or make the radio tech extend out a number of years?

+1 I support this question. I found not realistic to have the radio range to be extended just aving attached brigades to HQ, but now it seems there is no way to increase teh radio range... why not creating a transmition brigade that will be the only way to increase the radio range? It would be realistic IMO

 

[unmerged(154309)]

i have some question about ICBM ,when i played with germans,i tried to develop ICBM and mount a nuclear warhead on it,and i stumbled on one silly problem,my ICBM has extra short range with technology i think it was 1951 ,so i whent to notepad and changed the value in technology screen for engines ,my technology have moved to year 1967 and i still could not send my warheads from Portugal to USA,so i changed it one more time, i think to year 2002 and now i can send my ICBM missiles to USA(only east coast) ,butt isnt that REALY unrealistic,i think that ICBM with proper range was developed in 60's maybe late 50's but im sure that year wasnt 2000 or 1980

anyone with same problem?

every technology upgrade gives 50 km of range per level im not sure maybe it vas 200 km,isnt that to few?

 

[Bucyrus]

i think that ICBM with proper range was developed in 60's maybe late 50's but im sure that year wasnt 2000 or 1980

anyone with same problem?

every technology upgrade gives 50 km of range per level im not sure maybe it vas 200 km,isnt that to few?

Historically the USSR had the R-7 rocket operational from 1959 after around 5 years of testing - It could lift a 5000kg payload 7000km so a true ICBM

 

[catz27]

About technology exchange, does anyelse has been done for that?

Yes, there should be some factor, if there isn't already, for tech 'leakage' between alliance members. I think there is a similar function in EU where neighbors' with lesser tech get a bonus due to proximity. It would be nice to do this either:

1) Have common tech/doctrine research at a higher rate if an ally already has completed it.

2) Get random tech awarded from pool of already researched allied tech (e.g. get Radar 1 if an ally has it, maybe more likely if multiple allies have it). This could happen once a quarter or at random intervals.

Ideally, it would be nice to do multiple research efforts on more complicated techs (e.g. US/UK contributing research to Manhattan project), but that's probably more for an expansion.

 

[Pugmak]

One thing I'd like to see changed in the tech area is the practicals for MoT.

The biggest part of MoT is infantry. It's just infantry modified to use trucks to move along the roads toward a battle, then dismount and fight in the battle. They still employ as infantry. They just get to the area of the fight faster. But, MoT aint all about the trucks. It's mostly about the infantry in those trucks, when it comes to training.

 

[Rotmoses]

How about a tooltip that indicates how much IC it will cost to implement a new tech (upgrade). I find my upgrade cost vary a lot over time and also to be unpredictable.

 

[Federkiel]

How about starting techs for majors?

1) Will UK still start with techs to enhance it's research effort by 11% ??? That's not only unrealistic but also extremely inaccurate.
Even in game terms UK starts out with several 1941 techs in this field finished. It would have had to start this effort in full scale the late 20's to get there at all.
BTW., it was Konrad Zuse to invent calculation and computer machines. Alan Turing only was a theorist. His later work during the war work certainly didn't have any effect in 1936...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Zuse

Now with the bonuses in effect this would also cause extreme imbalances, especially in multiplayer games.



2) How about the first CV-tech for Germany? As of 1.3, Germany cannot start to build a CV in 1936 - while they historically did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_carrier_Graf_Zeppelin

 

[Munin]

- Increased fuel-usage by about 15% for all units.

I don't really see why fuel replaced $ in HOI3, is it a balance issue? I would find it slightly more realistic that money would ve been used for that: like it was the case in HOI2, I know I m probably repeating what someone already said but I just wanted to know what the reasoning was behind this change.

I don't remember having much problems with it (tech = $) when playing HOI2, but then again: I only played the mayor countries.

 

[Federkiel]

How about fuel and supply usage of stationary units which are not engaged in combat? Will it be reduced like it realistically was in HoI 2?

 

[Razor]

Very good!

 

[Cybvep]

It would be nice if new sliders were added - the ones that control research and espionage funding. Such actions should consume money after all. They could even be added as laws.

 

[Kovax]

The listed research changes, along with a few starting tech and Leadership values for "larger minors", should help balance things out a bit more realistically. I'm really hopeful that this patch will bring the game from "mostly playable" up to the "enjoyable" level.

 

[unmerged(172501)]

Bug fixes you have been waiting for, and a lot of updated techs as well.

- Updated starting techs for: Australia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Netherlands, Hungary, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Nationalist Spain, Republican Spain, Sweden, Turkey & Yugoslavia.
- Fuel and Supply consumption increases from technology gains are now percentage instead of absolute.
- Increased fuel-usage by about 15% for all units.
- Fixed research progress, could start do diverge, making it impossible to finish.
- Research efficiency techs now work properly.

I'm looking forward to this, and hopeful it will include some of the steps needed to be able to build infrastructure and other lower level tech items.

 

[Cokebottle Lovesnake]

What about the annoying fact, that once you completed a tech, the successor tech gets automatically put into the queue? It is supposed to be a convenience but it is an inconvenience. You could also make it an option but I think you please most people if you just switch it off.

Yes this would be great.

Any changes to this?

 

[SuiciSpai]

Yes this would be great.

Any changes to this?

I always have like 60 techs or so in queue, so its not a problem.:rofl:

 

[Forster]

Yes this would be great.

Any changes to this?

But then you might not know to start something new, wasting your research points. It is easy to solve the problem. Set your options to pop up a message and stop play. That will allow you to remove the one that just finished and add something new.

 

[101Man]

1) Why wouldn't a tech advance in Destroyer (DD) AA tech not help that tech in all other ships of the fleet (CL, CA, BB, CV, SS)? I mean once the 20mm and 40mm guns were invented all ships were retrofitted (IC on upgrades).