Interesting but TKS hardly qualify as light tank.
Wikipedia classify it as tankette https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankette and for good reasons.
Poland should start with TKS/Light Tank I researched in 1936 start.
- Thread starter AleksBoi.
- Start date
-
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.
Interesting but TKS hardly qualify as light tank.
Wikipedia classify it as tankette https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankette and for good reasons.
The whole armour tech tree should be reworked before trying to make the starting point historical
There was a tank in The Calculus Affair:
/read-tintin-comics-online-free-pdf-download-059.jpg)
Full PDF here: http://www.blackkat.net/tintin/pdf/18 - The Calculus Affair.pdf
The fact is that Poland in hoi4, polish DLC is very bad. The focus tree for example: it's political part is probably the smallest one in entire game. It realy lacks of options. I know that this dlc was free but they could at least patch it step by step. They don't do anything to fix that one.
And here comes this tank problem. This is one of those small improvements that require only a minute or two working and could make all of players happier. But becouse of some unknown reason they tend to omit major chenges to poland whenever new patch comes. The question is why?
And here comes this tank problem. This is one of those small improvements that require only a minute or two working and could make all of players happier. But becouse of some unknown reason they tend to omit major chenges to poland whenever new patch comes. The question is why?
Most excellent.
Thank you for pointing out tanks in TinTin (and providing documentation, to include a cliffhanger!)
Well done.
to be fair poland is getting infantry equipment pictures this patch .. haha :
+1 for relevant Tintin documentation!
BTW, in my polish game, I was shock to be stuck with Ignacy Mościcki and not getting Władysław Raczkiewicz while I played a non-submissive Poland (no allying to Germany or Russia) https://crusaderping.wordpress.com/...conferences-oddities-hearts-of-iron-iv-1-4-2/
Good that switching to democracy later got me a guy with proper moustaches, at least.
BTW, in my polish game, I was shock to be stuck with Ignacy Mościcki and not getting Władysław Raczkiewicz while I played a non-submissive Poland (no allying to Germany or Russia) https://crusaderping.wordpress.com/...conferences-oddities-hearts-of-iron-iv-1-4-2/
Good that switching to democracy later got me a guy with proper moustaches, at least.
The US lacks motorization in '36 likely because the US high command at the time was fanatically devoted to cavalry even into '41 to the point:
"The Idea of huge armies rolling acrosss roads at a fast pace is a dream" - Cavalry Journal 1940
"The Army's cavalry chief assured congress in 1941 that four well spaced horsemen could charge a half mile across an open field to destroy an enemy machine gun nest without sustaining a scratch" - Rick Atkinson's An Army at Dawn
"The motor mad advocates are obsessed with a mania of excluding the horse from war" Same officer, Dec. 3rd 1941
If they ever redo the US they should really suffer large penalties to doctrine and tank research until Marshall is able to start sacking generals, in 1939 the US professional army was the 17th largest (after Romania) and had comedic levels of equipment shortages"The Army's cavalry chief assured congress in 1941 that four well spaced horsemen could charge a half mile across an open field to destroy an enemy machine gun nest without sustaining a scratch" - Rick Atkinson's An Army at Dawn
"The motor mad advocates are obsessed with a mania of excluding the horse from war" Same officer, Dec. 3rd 1941
Yeah but, once again, it is hard to mimic what historically happend without opening the door to very gamey strategy.
And the German PzKpfw I could also be considered a tankette, it had a crew and armament comparable to the abovementioned CV33 and R-1.
PzKpfw I is nonetheless considered a light tank.
But even so, thing is you cannot claim that Poland should have light tank in 1936 on the ground it had some tankette.
And the fact that Germany had a light tank that, in some regard, could be considered a light tank, does not change anything. If anything, then it would mean that even Germany should not be considered to have a light tank, then, if it had only a light tank some consider a tankette. But Germany also had Panzerkampfwagen II. So whatever Panzerkampfwagen I was is completely irrelevant.
Tankette being light tank 1 has precedent with the Japanese and Italian light tank I also being tankettes, england too iirc. Germany starts equipped with pnzr 1s which is the extent of their relevance in the game currently. As to the US's cavalry idiocy, a focus/decision system based on date/army xp, being at war with a great power would let them get rid of a national spirit that could represent it, ot like with Britain put motorization behind a focus.
So...
More examples with the same broken logic?
as with Germany and Panzer II in 1936 (you wrote : Germany starts equipped with Panzer I - well, you could suggest then that they fix it and write Panzer II instead. Fact is Germany start equipped with light tanks has it had historically)
Japan, Type 95 Ha-Go in 1936,
Italy Fiat 3000 in 1936,
UK, Light Tanks mkII, mkIII...
Original poster said that since Poland had tankettes in 1936, in should be considered as having light tanks.
It is completely irrelevant that some other countries had tankette 1936, even that the game itself mention these, if they indeed had light tanks by then, aside from these.
(We can always fool around the definition of light tank. Obviously, weapons and armors that you expect on any tank differs over time. Most recent light tanks are likely to be better equiped in any regards than older heavy tanks)
Still, in 1936, Poland had Renault FT17 (and not even fitted with serious gun) and tankettes. So in the setup of the game, one WW1 era tank and tankettes, no light tanks. Unlike any of the other countries mentioned.
More examples with the same broken logic?
as with Germany and Panzer II in 1936 (you wrote : Germany starts equipped with Panzer I - well, you could suggest then that they fix it and write Panzer II instead. Fact is Germany start equipped with light tanks has it had historically)
Japan, Type 95 Ha-Go in 1936,
Italy Fiat 3000 in 1936,
UK, Light Tanks mkII, mkIII...
Original poster said that since Poland had tankettes in 1936, in should be considered as having light tanks.
It is completely irrelevant that some other countries had tankette 1936, even that the game itself mention these, if they indeed had light tanks by then, aside from these.
(We can always fool around the definition of light tank. Obviously, weapons and armors that you expect on any tank differs over time. Most recent light tanks are likely to be better equiped in any regards than older heavy tanks)
Still, in 1936, Poland had Renault FT17 (and not even fitted with serious gun) and tankettes. So in the setup of the game, one WW1 era tank and tankettes, no light tanks. Unlike any of the other countries mentioned.
Basically, Poland gets screwed over and desperately needs a rework 
Something I've been saying for years
Something I've been saying for years
Basically, Poland got historically screwed over. Major resistance country... subject to agreement between Nazis and USSR in view of its destruction... and then given to USSR, while many collaborationist countries (ah yeah, that got a phantom state in London) got full autonomy.
They were not able to face Germany and could not be. Right now, considering how often the Międzymorze (4/4 out my previous game), they are able to survive better than they did historically.
In any case, armored divisions where not Poland strong point in 1936. As real tank, they had mainly Renault FT17. And most of them, not well equiped (radio tanks, training tanks), quite outdated when war started.
(and if FT17 was to be took into account as ligth tank then all the following countries had it: Filand, Estonia, Litunia, Poland, Romania, Yougoslavia, Tchekoslovakia, Swiss, Spain, Belgium, Holland, Brasil, China, Japan, Iran)
They were not able to face Germany and could not be. Right now, considering how often the Międzymorze (4/4 out my previous game), they are able to survive better than they did historically.
In any case, armored divisions where not Poland strong point in 1936. As real tank, they had mainly Renault FT17. And most of them, not well equiped (radio tanks, training tanks), quite outdated when war started.
(and if FT17 was to be took into account as ligth tank then all the following countries had it: Filand, Estonia, Litunia, Poland, Romania, Yougoslavia, Tchekoslovakia, Swiss, Spain, Belgium, Holland, Brasil, China, Japan, Iran)
How does it get screwed when I managed to hold off germany without that much effort, playing historically (unaligned) with not gamey templates? And that's with OP MEFO bills even...Basically, Poland gets screwed over and desperately needs a rework
Look at the tech disparities plus my own thread experiences with divisions.
I think the problem with tankettes would be resolved after some overhaul to the tank research. Maybe they should be an separate category of tanks which are cheaper to produce than normal tanks, but have less armor and are generally easier to destroy than tanks, but can pierce through light tanks (or at least those up to 1936) and can be used as support company(Which would probably kill anti-air entirely. ). Or maybe overhaul whole tank development, where you research turrets, armor, threads etc. separately then making a new model out of them. (Like vehicle building in Original War. )
As it goes for wz.35 "Ur" Poland should probably start with Anti-Tank Weapons researched, or Anti-Tank weapons should be produced separately from Infantry Equipment. As far as I know, because this rifle was kept in secret, many Polish soldiers in 1939 weren't sure how to use them, because German tanks after being shot with this gun continued to move forward. Only after battles they found out that whole tank crew was dead, and their dead bodies made these tanks move forward.
I think that Polish overhaul will come when Paradox will improve (Or rather create...) some resistance system in the game, as Poland had one of biggest resistance movements in Europe.
). Or maybe overhaul whole tank development, where you research turrets, armor, threads etc. separately then making a new model out of them. (Like vehicle building in Original War. )(BTW. If someone is interested in Polish tankettes, I recomend this movie:
)
(If you speak Polish there's a pretty good video made about this:
)
I think that Polish overhaul will come when Paradox will improve (Or rather create...) some resistance system in the game, as Poland had one of biggest resistance movements in Europe.
As far as I'm aware the last recorded cavalry charge in 2WW(Or in history, but I'm not sure.) was made by the USA.
Last edited:
If we're going to split hairs over tank definitions then the entire tank tech tree is broken which.... yeah ok it is (really all of them are). Given the British Infantry Tank/Cruiser tank split not fitting into the light/mdeium/heavy tank concept, the placing of the Matilda and Churchill in the UK tech tree, T34s being equivalent to Shermans, etc. the thing seems to be artificial balance distinctions in which case we can throw historical accuracy out the window. The point is the TKS has been designated by pdox as Light Tank I, Poland had the TKS in 1936 irl, they should have it in game.