Technology

[King Thomas I]

Redesigned while on slipway, but still in 0.2 they are classified as imp. p-d, the same Viribus-Unitis class and Ganguts.
I also noticed lack of other in build Russian battleships (Impierator Aleksandr-com. June 1917, Impieratrica Maria-com. July 1915, Impieratrica Ekaterina II-com. October 1915, all in build before war) and battlecruisers (never commissioned, but in build in 1914, launched in 1915/1916)

 

[StephenT]

According to my reference sources (Conway's and Jane's), the Nassau, Viribus Unitis and Gangut classes are all treated as dreadnoughts. As far as I was aware, that's how they're treated in the mod too. However, remember the confusion about models when the extra level was added!

From germany.inc:

division = { id = { type = 22111 id = 567 } name = "SMS Nassau" type = battleship model = 2 }

This is actually correct, but only if we change things so that early PDs are model/0, late PDs are model/1 and DNs are model/2...


As for the Russian build queue, all the battleships are included. The battlecruisers aren't - I'm not sure why, unless it was assumed that they were laid down so late in 1913 (19 December) it was better to leave the choice to the player... especially since historically they were all cancelled anyway.

 

[StephenT]

As for the re-designed Russian ships: it's good information, but consider that the previous ship class dates back to 1890, while dreadnoughts have an in-game date of 1908. (I think the completion of the historical HMS Dreadnought in just a year is a classic real-life example of 'tech-rushing').

The half-way point between those two dates would be 1899; I think dating the late pre-dreadnought model to 1900 is a reasonable compromise. The ships you talk about seem to me more like attempts to design an equivalent of the Dreadnought; and the designers eventually realised it wouldn't actually be possible to do so unless they copied the dreadnought design in full.

Meanwhile, we have dozens of battleships launched in 1900-1906 that were significantly more powerful than those launched in 1890-99. I think we need to use the new ship model for those vessels, instead of confining it to a handful of ships which mostly weren't even taken further than the planning stage...

As a rule of thumb, can people agree on this?

Battleships, ironclads, monitors, turret ships and other first-line warships launched before 1890: heavy_cruiser model 0 (Ironclad)

Pre-dreadnoughts launched 1890-1899, plus armoured coastal defence ships, second-rate battleships and other such craft launched after 1900: battleship model 0 (Early Pre-Dreadnought)

Pre-dreadnoughts launched in 1900 or later: battleship model 1 (Late Pre-Dreadnought)

Dreadnoughts launched in or after 1906, armed with 11" or 12" guns: battleship model 2 (Dreadnought)

Superdreadnoughts would be ships with larger-calibre guns (13.5" on British ships) or a huge number of 12" guns (like some of the South American or Japanese ships). Battleships would move up 14" or 15" guns, and be significantly faster. Improved Battleships would be the ultimate warships of the period, probably with 16" guns.

Monitors would be ships launched in or after 1915 with at least two modern 12" guns. (Although several smaller monitors could be amalgamated into a single Monitor unit in the game).


(Incidentally, I'm saying 'launched' rather than laid down or commissioned bacause I think that information is easiest to find; and also it's the half-way point of the ship's development, so a good compromise)

 

[smosquito]

I originally posted this elsewhere. But...

Specifically I would suggest these changes to the British Techteams.

Portsmouth RND > Vickers.
WM Beadmore > W.C. Armstrong. - aeronautics. + (regular) artillery.
British Westinghouse > Marconi. skill goes from 5 to 6. + industrial_efficiency
(Marconi was active at the time as well. Much more active in radio than Westinghouse).
add Rolls Royce > w/industrial efficiency,mechanics,technical efficiency,automotive.
Maj General HC Foulkes > ICI. Yes it's not founded until the 20's or 30's. The idea is to have a better representative of Chemical Engineering, and the four founding companies all all active in the period. skill 6?
Capt. WH Livens > Anglo Iranian. This company was active and very important in the period. skill 6?

And these to the German techteams.
Krupp > 9 + general equipment (Sounds better as Freid. Krupp AG as well)
Mauser > -artillery
Fritz Haber > IG Farben. skill 9. IG Farben easier as a single company than Bayer/Hoechst/BASF.
Zeppelin > skill 7. He was important. But not that important. There are plenty of other German aero teams as well.
von Richtofen > skill 8. Same argument.
Scheer and Hipper > skill 4

Schneider Le Creusot probably warrants general equipment as well.

<originally I claimed Vickers built all the dreadnoughts, and Portsmouth only built Dreadnought.> Of course, I am wrong about Portsmouth and the number of Dreadnoughts constructed. I do not make any claims about my data. Still, IMO Vickers is much more important to shipbuilding generally inthe period and thus a better candidate than Pompey. It's also a bigger yard (though I guess not in Dreadnoughts), and Vickers' diversification into different areas (Guns and Armour) fits a 'techteam' better. Brown, Harland, Cammell are the next most important UK shipbuilders. Parsons built all the machinery. Armstrong cast most of the guns (I think).

You could also call the team the 'Naval Constructors', but that lacks style.

Vickers and Armstrong both are of course the UK counterpart to Krupp and Schneider. Additional reasons why I think they should be tech teams as such.

BTW the music is excellent.

 

[StephenT]

This was spotted by Slawman in the Playtest thread, but I thought I'd repost it here to make sure it was picked up.

There's an error (repeated) in the Industrial tech tree.

Industry tech 5620 (Basic counter-intel)
Industry tech 5640 (Improved counter-intel)

command = { type = intelligence which = them value = 10 }
command = { type = army_detection which = them value = 10 }

These values should be -10, not 10 ! At the moment developing the tech is a benefit to the enemy, not a penalty. :wacko:


Also, I noticed that none of the techs - as far as I can see - give bonuses to the 'surprise' modifier. Is this right?

 

[unmerged(42100)]

I have photos for the Spanish tech teams. Some are a bit uncorrect, due to the lack of sources (Esperanza y Unceta or Escuela naval de San Fernando), but they'll work. I was unable to find any image that would fit the Instituto Químico de Sarriá, because it exist nowadays, and the net only provides modern images.

But, having that work done, my questions are:
Should I upload directly to the forum and let the hard work for the big ones?
if that
Should I upload them in an specific resolution or size, and the right name (i mean t-whatever)?

Please, i need some hints about that.

Well. And i have a team that might be included: Pirotecnia Militar y Fábrica de Artillería de Sevilla, skill 3, chemistry, general equipment and artillery. This two factories worked together and produced several amounts of ammo and quite ancient artillery pieces, until the sixties. It was, with Toledo, the main production centre of Spain.
On the other hand, i would remove artillery from the team Esperanza y Unceta. In the early stages of her life, the company only crafted personal weapons. Revolvers and pistols. The pistols "astra", very famous even nowadays, are from the early 20's, and some years later the company changed to "Unceta & Cía".
Should i upload the changed teams_spa.csv file?

I'm still enjoying some free time, so i will continue working.

 

[unmerged(31857)]

secret weapons tree

just a quick jot. Has there been any progress on the secret weapons tree?

 

[unmerged(53222)]

I have photos for the Spanish tech teams. Some are a bit uncorrect, due to the lack of sources (Esperanza y Unceta or Escuela naval de San Fernando), but they'll work. I was unable to find any image that would fit the Instituto Químico de Sarriá, because it exist nowadays, and the net only provides modern images.

But, having that work done, my questions are:
Should I upload directly to the forum and let the hard work for the big ones?
if that
Should I upload them in an specific resolution or size, and the right name (i mean t-whatever)?

Please, i need some hints about that.

Well. And i have a team that might be included: Pirotecnia Militar y Fábrica de Artillería de Sevilla, skill 3, chemistry, general equipment and artillery. This two factories worked together and produced several amounts of ammo and quite ancient artillery pieces, until the sixties. It was, with Toledo, the main production centre of Spain.
On the other hand, i would remove artillery from the team Esperanza y Unceta. In the early stages of her life, the company only crafted personal weapons. Revolvers and pistols. The pistols "astra", very famous even nowadays, are from the early 20's, and some years later the company changed to "Unceta & Cía".
Should i upload the changed teams_spa.csv file?

I'm still enjoying some free time, so i will continue working.

Yes, you can upload the files here for now.

 

[smosquito]

May I make a suggestion regarding the German Tech Teams? (yes another one.)

Krupp is too big to be limited to one infantry/artillery techteam. Furthermore it has been hitherto undervalued in the game as it is, at skill 7 and without general equipment.

If I read history correctly Krupp was the reason why Germany was superior in artillery, was one of the reasons why the German government and army paid so much attention to superior firepower, and was also the greatest manufacturing company on earth, making locomotives, train tyres, steel, ships and the guns equipping them. Furthermore, they supplied artillery not only to Germany but also to most of the other countries in the world, far outstripping their nearest rivals, Schenieder, Vickers and Armstrong.

Therefore I would suggest splitting it in the following way.

The Essen Gusstalfabrik is the heart of the Empire. This will be Freidrich Krupp AG. Skill 9. Attributes making it the most potent artillery/infantry weapons research group in the game.

The Hermann Grusonwerk is part #2, supplying naval artillery capability, but still with artillery/infantry research capability. (This was wholly owned by Krupp by the early 1900's but was the developer of the Krupp Cemented Armour which all naval surface ships used.) Skill 7.

Alternatively, Krupp #2 as it were could be the Germaniawerft. Skill 7.

In this way Germany has two artillery/infantry weapon techteams, plus Mauser which IMO should be skill 7, though without the artillery attribute.

 

[Allenby]

These are all very interesting observations, but do we still have ZgB manning the tech team files? If he is, then he will oblige and make whatever changes he believes to be necessary.

 

[smosquito]

It looks like your man has gone for Rehinmetall instead of Krupp #2. Which is fine.

I personally would use the Germaniawerft instead of the other shipyards you've got, but that's probably 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.

But the crux of the matter to me is this. Krupp is still at skill 7. And Mauser is at skill 8. And Mauser has an Artillery Attribute.

Krupp should be skill 9. Mauser should be skill 7. No Artillery. IMO.
Krupp because it was gigantic, and prolific deserves this. Mauser made a great sniper rifle (though it was less of a great infantry rifle than the SMLE IMO) and they didn't make artillery.

Also, there's no Vickers nor Armstrong... Clearly Vickers and Armstrongs were far more important in general shipbuilding, naval design, artillery and naval artillery production than Pompey or Mssrs. Wm. Beardmore.

etc...

 

[smosquito]

Sorry. I am being rather insistent in my critiques. I should like to say this is because I like the game and would like for it to be even better than it already is. This is not because I have some particular axe to grind against any certain individual or individuals, or the developers generally.

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

Regarding smosquito´s suggestions:

Portsmouth RND > Vickers. - Done
WM Beadmore > W.C. Armstrong. - Not really sure. Please elaborate
British Westinghouse > Marconi. - All suggestions incorporated
add Rolls Royce - Added
Maj General HC Foulkes > ICI. - No. Foulkes was very instrumental in developing poison gas
Capt. WH Livens > Anglo Iranian. - Changed

And these to the German techteams.
Krupp > 9 + general equipment - Changed to 9, but didn´t add GE
Mauser > -artillery - NO. As an infantry researcher, they need artillery, if even for gameplay only
Fritz Haber > IG Farben. skill 9. - IG Farben wasn´t founded until the 1920-ties
Zeppelin > skill 7. He was important. But not that important. There are plenty of other German aero teams as well. - OK
von Richtofen > skill 8. Same argument. - OK
Scheer and Hipper > skill 4 - I see your point. Changed

Schneider Le Creusot probably warrants general equipment as well. - The french should run away rather than fight the germans with overpowered cyborgs

Splitting Krupp - Not a priority at the moment. Suggestion noted

Mauser Werke changed to skill 7

 

[smosquito]

but... now everybody's going to blame me...

anyhow. cheers.

BTW I wish I could convince you to change Beardmore to Armstrongs. Really, this is a very important naval artillery developer for Britain.

For support I am going to say check the wikipedia for Armstrong naval guns 15" You should get the article for the British 15"/42 calibre. Some of these were indeed made by William Beardmore. More were made however by Armstrongs. (In fact the most were made by Vickers at Barrow.)

I wish I had production figures immediately to hand for 13.5 and 12 inch guns, but lacking that I would say that probably the same preponderance of guns were made by Vickers as Armstrongs for these as for the 15".

Anyhow I hate using the Wikipedia as a source, but it is easy to do...

As far as naval techteams for Britain go, in 1914, Vickers should be #1. Armstrongs should be #2. And Vickers should be a lesser Krupp, in artillery research, for Britain.

If I may editiorialise Armstrongs had perhaps reached their zenith in the pre-dreadnought era. But they were still the second most influential British arms maker after Vickers.

BTW It's actually W.G. Armstrong, not as I have earlier said W.C. Armstrong. For this inaccuracy, I apologize.

Disclaimer: In these cases, I go largely by memory of the books I have read, and places I have visited, not by actual facts immediately at hand. Furthermore, I am an engineer by trade, not an historian.

 

[Dominik]

Early Airship is designated as 1915 but the tech has historical year 1914. Which is correct?

Also I would like to know what's going to be done with armor/light_armor division models? Present, they are not mentioned in the tech files and there are differences between model file and unit_names.csv.

 

[Allenby]

Early Airship is designated as 1915 but the tech has historical year 1914. Which is correct?

1914, I believe.

Also I would like to know what's going to be done with armor/light_armor division models? Present, they are not mentioned in the tech files and there are differences between model file and unit_names.csv.

There are no plans, as yet, for light armour divisions.

 

[Dominik]

Is it possible to drop the concept of escort fighters? They are a WW2 idea and give many problems with HOI2/DD version compatibility.

As I understand there will be only tank brigades and no light armor/armor divisions at all? So there are two divisional types free... But maybe the armor divisions as a secret weapon could be introduced?

I will fix the airship on the image and in the config files later.

 

[Allenby]

Is it possible to drop the concept of escort fighters? They are a WW2 idea and give many problems with HOI2/DD version compatibility.

The same Second World War idea that spawned the use of escort fighters to accompany observation planes on reconnaissance during the First World War?

As I understand there will be only tank brigades and no light armor/armor divisions at all? So there are two divisional types free... But maybe the armor divisions as a secret weapon could be introduced?

I will fix the airship on the image and in the config files later.

The intention is to have two models of armoured division - 1919 and 1924.

 

[Dominik]

The same Second World War idea that spawned the use of escort fighters to accompany observation planes on reconnaissance during the First World War?

The intention is to have two models of armoured division - 1919 and 1924.

But this is not the same as long-range escort fighters of WW2... There were more like normal fighters on an escort mission. Otherwise we will have to deal with complication of division/brigade type.

Two models but in a single time, f.e. in armored division type. That leaves light armored division type for anything we may desire. Or the other way round, it's just that it hasn't been decided yet, I think, which division type (4 or 5) to use.

 

[Allenby]

But this is not the same as long-range escort fighters of WW2... There were more like normal fighters on an escort mission. Otherwise we will have to deal with complication of division/brigade type.

I think that this overlooks the fact that the fighters that accompanied reconnaissance planes on these missions were very often specifically designed for that role.

The Russian Sikorski XVI and German Roland D.II are examples.

Two models but in a single time, f.e. in armored division type. That leaves light armored division type for anything we may desire. Or the other way round, it's just that it hasn't been decided yet, I think, which division type (4 or 5) to use.

Definately four.