When HoI-games will have really correct ship stats and ship classes?

  • 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.

RisingSun

Colonel
14 Badges
Mar 26, 2005
965
78
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Iron Cross
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
Don't forget the USS Ranger being better than the Saratoga and Yorktown. I know why it was done that way, but I don't have to like it.

Can this be done with Naval doctrines or Techs by any chance? US carriers +speed -hull, UK carriers the opposite? US BBs +speed +IC cost +fuel consumption, Ger BBs +speed -hull?

Ranger better than Yorktown? If that is true, like researching it backward from Saratoga, Yorktown then Essex Class. Pretty much they will make USS Ranger a Yorktown Class. All i can say is that if they added additional upgrades, there are pros and cons about them as well. For example, a Battleship upgrade with more armor during construction (not refit) will slowed down the Battleship some. Refits would only upgrade firecontrols, radars, AA guns, etcs.
 

Secret Master

Covert Mastermind
Moderator
95 Badges
Jul 9, 2001
36.559
19.760
www.youtube.com
  • 200k Club
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • March of the Eagles
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Limited Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • The Kings Crusade
I am thinking the opening posters stats maybe has forgotten about torpedoes from light cruisers and destroyers is there preferred method of attack vs a capital ship, and a deadly threat at night and / or under cover with smoke screens. The sea attack of 1 / 2 for a destroyer flotilla in the table above seems laughably low to me. Real world example is the results Taffy 3 achieved at Leyte.

Plus main gun with effective radar plotting is a major multiplier of effectiveness than just considering gun caliber. Shots on target from an Iowa 25 to a Queen Elizabeth 20 in the table above - would be more like attack value of 25 to 10, in my non-expert view. Is this worth considering?

I really hope that torpedoes get a separate mechanic in HOI4. In HOI3, torpedoes are just assumed to be a part of the ever increasing sea attack values for ships that keep using 5 inch guns.

As for RADAR or other tools that improve the chance of hitting a target with guns, there is some merit to the suggestion. HOI3 already uses RADAR to reduce the night penalty (and for those counting, with high enough RADAR on capital ships, you can eliminate it entirely).

However, there is a finite amount of accuracy improvement you can do with surface gunfire so long as you are using unguided shells. Time to target without course correction is still time to target without course correction. If you take the ability to improve combat efficiency via optics and RADAR too far in HOI3, Yamato is going to be hitting US carriers with the accuracy of a Harpoon or Silkworm missile by the end of the war.


Well, couldnt most of that be simulated by simple changes to the HoI3 system?

1. Add some disadvantages to ship techs. If you build a ship with all techs a the same level, it will be similiar to HoI3.
But if you use weaker armor/guns, you would get a ship that is weaker but faster than current ships.

I used to think this way. Then I ran dozens of ship battles in side-by-side multiplayer and concluded that if you implemented this in HOI3, it would result in either indistinguishable builds (because the disadvantages are so small as to not matter) or zerg-style battleships with weak hulls, massive sea attack and high speed (because by 1940, battleship sea attack easily overwhelms battleship hull increases).

For those paying attention, that is not unlike how armored divisions are built in some cases. (Fast and hard hitting, or more generalist)

2. Add some new (unbuildable) shipclasses for the early war szenarios. So the Hood could be a level 3 dreadnought instead of a level 1 battleship.
That way these ships could be balanced indepedently from normal battleships and have different values. Of course, some of the battleship upgrades (AA, Radar) could also apply to them to keep them usefull later in the game.

An interesting idea.

3. Add some kind of armor mechanic similar to TFH tanks. Not much, just a bit to make battleships more usefull against cruiser/destroyer spam.

I've also advocated this before, with the added consideration that it could also make older battleships still useful against new cruisers.

I would recommend to add ship classes for specific nations, not all ship classes are equal. For example, during the war in the pacific, british had a bad habit adding deck armour on carriers and believe it reduce the airgroup. Remember reading an paragraphs from American point of views, thats why Essex Class carriers are so easy to built with light protection on the flightdeck. Either you add ship classes for specific countries or use your simple template units like you have in previous HoISeries and add improvement stats like "Improved Hull", "Advance Torpedoes" , etcs. During the War in the Pacific, Japanese had the best long lance ship-bourne torpedoes!

I know you aren't the only one to argue in favor of this, but let me ask you a question:

If you include specific ship classes for specific nations, then what do you do about countries that choose to learn from past mistakes? If you give Germany a crappy template for Graf Zepplin so that it sucks compared to Essex carriers (and the historical one would have no doubt sucked compared to Essex carriers if it had ever been finished), do you then just lock Germany into sucky aircraft carrier land, never to return? Or do you give Germany fake future classes that are somehow magically better, despite Germany never really planning or building another class? And which answer is really historical, given what we know about various countries improving ship designs as they fought in the war?
 

Nick3210

Captain
1 Badges
Aug 7, 2013
459
292
  • Darkest Hour
When the game starts ( 1936 ) the 2:nd London treaty was being negotiated by France, UK and USA, so only the allies. All axis powers had withdrawn by then.

Thus the treaties posed no limits to any Axis shipbuilding or design historically or in the game.

As an allied player you are however free to roleplay the treaties by not researching any heavier ship technology if you want to... or you can take the historical route and design heavier ships...

What will be HoI-4? Historical game or alternative history game?

If HoI4 will be alternative history game, all start and under construction ships on 01.01.1936 must have historical stats, but next new ship's classes can be made as: "More new = faster, stronger, bigger and more ALL!"

If HoI-4 will be history game - not only ships on 01.01.1936 must be based on real ship's characteristics - all ships must be based on real ship's characteristics.

In 01.01.36 scenario there are a lot of ships in the world and a lot of ships under construction. And much of these ships are "children" of "Washington's treaty" and "london's treaty". So these treaties are very important factor for Nevy simulation in HoI.

You are claiming that the only factor worth worrying about regarding how much damage Battleships can inflict is caliber and amount of Guns. I am claiming it is a bit more complex then that and that everything from reloading speed, to aiming speed to training to radar & firecontrol can impact the effectiveness.

I advice you check up how well the Italian and Japanese Battleships and cruisers performed in actual surface battle.
( hint: they were not impressive at all despite many and heavy guns ).

I absolutely agree! There are much other factors! But lets begin way from the first easy step! :)
Ship's stats in HoI-2-3 was not based on reality! And if we will make the first step and will base ship's stats on 4 main characteristics - main calibre, number of main calibre, main armour and ship's speed - it will be a Grand success! :)

Then, if you want dig deeper - OK! You can use so much factors as you can!
And not forget - torpedoes, radars, AA, targeting systems and other improves can be made as "brigades".

I'm not against deep study of battle factors, I am against stats from sky as in HoI-2-3.

So only one out of all the Battleships built leading up too and during WW2 ( HMS So only one out of all the Battleships built leading up too and during WW2 ( HMS Vanguard ) used an old WW1 design for the maingun turrets, A ship that was not even completed before the war ended anyways... and therefore "yes really"?) used an old WW1 design for the maingun turrets, A ship that was not even completed before the war ended anyways... and therefore "yes really"?

OK, Ok. I am lasy find info about cruisers 203 mm, yes only one time - Vanguard :)
But as I see many of these cannons had 2 shots in a minute - old and new systems have equival speed. So it's no matter.

How convenient that you forgot one:

Italian 380mm main gun - 45 sek for one shot.
That is almost double the time of the Bismarck or equivalent to 45% less firepower/amount of guns. Do you really consider twice the firepower to be a factor that "can be ignored in HoI simulation"?

Not only Italian! UK 16'' had any problems too :) It taked 40 sec for one shot.

But! Сlassification and implementation of real ship's characteristics into HoI-model needs any compromise, of course!

We must made several ship's levels. But all ships are different! It is not tanks or planes.
And we need make these base ship level as a compromise between several ships with any difference between each other.

Look at my first table in this post:

Improved (4-level): King George V / Bismarck/ Littorio/ Richelieu
Main calibre 10-356/ 8-380/ 9-380/ 8-380
Armour 381/ 320/ 350/ 330
Speed 28/ 29/ 30/ 30
Displ 43/ 52/ 45/ 48

And we need find any "Typical average ship" based on these very diffirent ships!
Littorio takes 45 sec for shot as you say? It is not matter! :) Our compromise is large! And I see Littorio have 9 cannons, not 8.

It can be diffirent opinions - what stats must have "Typical average ship" which will simulate all these real ships in HoI.
By my mind Bismarck is good candidates for it. (with compromise stats!)

4 lvl (a'la "Bismarck") 8-380 / 330/ 29/ 45

And all these 4 different ships will be equal in game, yes!
But it's impossible to make classification and implementation without any compromise.

In my second table I try to find optimal "Typical average ship" based on first table.
Yes, it can be diffirent opinions about it! But correct and historicity classification with any compromise stats must be done!
Not by princip "More new = all stats are higher"!
 
Last edited:

Pablius

Captain
90 Badges
May 22, 2004
366
33
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • 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
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • March of the Eagles
I think Paradox should put an sticky thread in all HOI forums stating in big capital letters that this not a simulation, names are for flavor mostly and standardization an abstraction are a must in grand strategy games that do not aim for perfect historicity

Maybe then we could save ourselves this pointless threads...go and make your own game about naval statistics, I`m sure it will be fascinating, maybe I`ll play it given how an avid detail freak I can be about this stuff sometimes, but HOI it`s not that game

And more on topic, anyone looking at naval ship design knows how much things differ from one ship to the other, even within classes, specially over time, and classes themselves can be quite arbitrary

Paradox would need to put so many resources on this that the rest of the game would suffer, it`s not worth it
 

RisingSun

Colonel
14 Badges
Mar 26, 2005
965
78
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Iron Cross
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
I know you aren't the only one to argue in favor of this, but let me ask you a question:

If you include specific ship classes for specific nations, then what do you do about countries that choose to learn from past mistakes? If you give Germany a crappy template for Graf Zepplin so that it sucks compared to Essex carriers (and the historical one would have no doubt sucked compared to Essex carriers if it had ever been finished), do you then just lock Germany into sucky aircraft carrier land, never to return? Or do you give Germany fake future classes that are somehow magically better, despite Germany never really planning or building another class? And which answer is really historical, given what we know about various countries improving ship designs as they fought in the war?

During the war, sometimes they will pick up the pieces and study it. For example a captured fighter plane, after study it, may improve performance on their parts. Samnthing when the Russias took over Berlin and manage to get their hands on how to make nukes. But yes, there should be specific units for each countries, some have pros and cons. Or we can have options to make thing completely different. Guess players out there like both options, that explains why players are making mods to make it more realistic?

We all like to see HoI4 to improve much better than previous series. Weird things that every time HoI Series release, it get more and more complex.
 

Porkman

Field Marshal
20 Badges
Nov 4, 2006
3.219
1.410
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • 500k Club
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
During the war, sometimes they will pick up the pieces and study it. For example a captured fighter plane, after study it, may improve performance on their parts. Samnthing when the Russias took over Berlin and manage to get their hands on how to make nukes. But yes, there should be specific units for each countries, some have pros and cons. Or we can have options to make thing completely different. Guess players out there like both options, that explains why players are making mods to make it more realistic?

We all like to see HoI4 to improve much better than previous series. Weird things that every time HoI Series release, it get more and more complex.

The Russians learned how to build nukes because they had a spy, Klaus Fuchs, on the Manhattan Project. Taking Berlin had nothing to do with it.
 

Secret Master

Covert Mastermind
Moderator
95 Badges
Jul 9, 2001
36.559
19.760
www.youtube.com
  • 200k Club
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • March of the Eagles
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Limited Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • The Kings Crusade
During the war, sometimes they will pick up the pieces and study it.

I'm not talking about stealing tech. That's a whole other thing.

I'm literally talking about this:

"Glorious leader, we just built our first 2 aircraft carriers, Herpgrad and Herpland. We learned a lot from building them. We've also used them in combat, so we know what parts of our design work and what parts need improvement. We want to build 2 more. What should we do?"

"Well, our country, Herpland, only has 1 type of aircraft carrier."

"So we'll literally just build the exact same ship, with the same flaws, even though we know more than we did 3 years ago about building aircraft carriers?"

"Yep. Is that not how every country in WWII built ships?"

"Ummm, sure glorious leader."

"Great. And shoot any scientists who invent better bulkheads, better engines, better armor, larger fuel tanks, better aircraft catapults, and so on. You know the drill."

This is the end result of having nation specific units. It also works the other way, where Derpland gets awesome carriers, even if they stopped building them in the 1930s.

I submit to you that this kind of game mechanic might have some flaws in both gameplay and historical contexts.
 

RisingSun

Colonel
14 Badges
Mar 26, 2005
965
78
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Iron Cross
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
I'm not talking about stealing tech. That's a whole other thing.

I'm literally talking about this:

"Glorious leader, we just built our first 2 aircraft carriers, Herpgrad and Herpland. We learned a lot from building them. We've also used them in combat, so we know what parts of our design work and what parts need improvement. We want to build 2 more. What should we do?"

"Well, our country, Herpland, only has 1 type of aircraft carrier."

"So we'll literally just build the exact same ship, with the same flaws, even though we know more than we did 3 years ago about building aircraft carriers?"

"Yep. Is that not how every country in WWII built ships?"

"Ummm, sure glorious leader."

"Great. And shoot any scientists who invent better bulkheads, better engines, better armor, larger fuel tanks, better aircraft catapults, and so on. You know the drill."

This is the end result of having nation specific units. It also works the other way, where Derpland gets awesome carriers, even if they stopped building them in the 1930s.

I submit to you that this kind of game mechanic might have some flaws in both gameplay and historical contexts.

I am talking about when enemy planes is caught (more advanced) like the Russias or any other nations did. This is how US, USSR and others manage to beef up new ideas and techs. Another words, it give them an ideas that is needed, like US doesnt want the USSR get their hands on it. Maybe when something like this happen, can bring up a new events?

The Russians learned how to build nukes because they had a spy, Klaus Fuchs, on the Manhattan Project. Taking Berlin had nothing to do with it.

It would take more than spies to get their hands on something that big, once they gain control of that areas, give them alot more chances to learn it. Spies on the otherhands are very low chances. When USSR took over Berlin, there were ballistic missiles like the V2 as well nuke somewhere around, or rumors? I know this can be pretty complex going in this directions, but it what really happen back then.

Beside it wouldnt matter if they going to make HoI4 like 1936-1946, but if this push onward to 1963, then it should be in there or able to.
 

Secret Master

Covert Mastermind
Moderator
95 Badges
Jul 9, 2001
36.559
19.760
www.youtube.com
  • 200k Club
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • March of the Eagles
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Mount & Blade: With Fire and Sword
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II: Limited Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • 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
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • A Game of Dwarves
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • King Arthur II
  • The Kings Crusade
I am talking about when enemy planes is caught (more advanced) like the Russias or any other nations did. This is how US, USSR and others manage to beef up new ideas and techs. Another words, it give them an ideas that is needed, like US doesnt want the USSR get their hands on it. Maybe when something like this happen, can bring up a new events?

But you said earlier the following words:

I would recommend to add ship classes for specific nations, not all ship classes are equal. For example, during the war in the pacific, british had a bad habit adding deck armour on carriers and believe it reduce the airgroup. Remember reading an paragraphs from American point of views, thats why Essex Class carriers are so easy to built with light protection on the flightdeck. Either you add ship classes for specific countries or use your simple template units like you have in previous HoISeries and add improvement stats like "Improved Hull", "Advance Torpedoes" , etcs. During the War in the Pacific, Japanese had the best long lance ship-bourne torpedoes!

You are also not the only person advocating for nation-specific equipment and ships.

So, I've been asking you whether such a mechanic seems reasonable in either a historical context or a gameplay context. I would think that there are serious implications from just having country specific naval ship designs.
 

Alex_brunius

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Mar 24, 2006
22.404
5.017
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • War of the Roses
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Magicka 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Achtung Panzer
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • PDXCON 2017 Gold Ticket holder
  • Surviving Mars
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
Not only Italian! UK 16'' had any problems too :) It taked 40 sec for one shot.

...

Improved (4-level): King George V / Bismarck/ Littorio/ Richelieu
Main calibre 10-356/ 8-380/ 9-380/ 8-380
Armour 381/ 320/ 350/ 330
Speed 28/ 29/ 30/ 30
Displ 43/ 52/ 45/ 48

To figure out how many main gun shells the ship can shoot per minute you need to take [number of guns] and factor in the reloading speed, it makes a huge difference.

If we for example use the fire cycle numbers from this source ( Bismarck 20 sec cycle ) we get:

Littorio has 9 guns * 1.33 shells per min = 12 shells
While Bismarck has 8 guns * 3 shells per min = 24 shells!

So according to your way of counting Littorio should have 12% higher sea attack then Bismarck due to more guns.
According to my way of counting Bismarck could have twice the sea attack values due to insanely fast fire cycle.

If you add in the fact that Bismarck's guns probably more accurate as well the amount of hits they could land in a minute could be 3-4 times higher then the Italian counterpart...
Well modern guns did make a huge difference, and German guns were ( arguably ) the most advanced in the war.


This is of-course only theoretical numbers relevant in a more or less point blank engagement, and they are more to prove how much fire cycle can differ in a worst case scenario.
A more plausible/realistic scenario the comparison for actual fire cycles and firepower is also done in the footnotes on the same homepage
Still in this compairson Bismarck comes out a solid 14% ahead of Littorio instead of behind, and this is without taking accuracy into account, only pure firepower. About accuracy the following is written:

"The Italian 15" was an extraordinarily powerful gun, but achieved its performance at the cost of exorbitant barrel wear (barrel life for this weapon was in the neighborhood of 110-130 'effective full charges'; roughly half that of most other nationalities' 15" guns) and reduced accuracy due to wide salvo spreads. All in all, the tradeoffs probably weren't worth it"

"Bismarck's 15"/47 shell is 10% lighter than the French and Italian, although her cyclic rate is attractive, and her guns were very accurate"


Littorio takes 45 sec for shot as you say? It is not matter! :) Our compromise is large! And I see Littorio have 9 cannons, not 8.

If your compromise is that large why do you care if Littorio has 8, 9 or 16 guns? It has the same effect on how many shells it can fire in a minute that fire cycle does!




The numbers for fire cycle are not hard to come by and many good in-depth studies taking this and much more into account have been conducted like the one linked in this post.
 
Last edited:

Solon

Captain
Oct 3, 2003
327
0
Visit site
The answer to all of this is to go back to the technology method used in HoI-1. There, as I recall, each ship Type had about 5 basic technologies that you had to research: engines, guns, hull, armor, and fire control. Later in the game, when your overall technology improved, things like refrigeration, radar and radio came into play and required research. Submarines and surface ships had their own different torpedoes, and each level of ship had improved torpedoes. In addition, submarines had their own set of special technology, like periscopes, engines, batteries, sonar, deck guns, hull (diving depth), welding, etc. Later submarines also got into radar and unusual things like sonar deflecting hull coatings.

Basically, you had to build up the technology in each area for each class of ship, and you could field ships along the way that were not as good as you would like, just to get them into the water. The system also allowed you to "Up grade" your finished ships. They had to be in harbor, and it was like upgrading a land unit, it took time and IC to do it. As I recall, the ship actually disappeared from the game Map, went into a special column, and was governed by the overall amount that you had assigned to upgrading units. When it was complete it showed up again in the exact same harbor that you had started from when you commenced the upgrade. I believe that it could only be done in your own national harbors. You could only do this within a certain type of hull...in other words, you could not put a modern Alaska Heavy Cruiser onto a WWI or 1931 cruiser hull, the size, hull shape and other factors would make this impossible, and the game prohibited a "Frankenstein" upgrade.

I believe that the Game used the technology level that you had researched to "rate" the performance of each one of the games' statistic for that ship. For example, if you still had the WWI torpedoes on your new Level 3 destroyer, then it only had a torpedo attack of "1", instead of "3", like other Level 3 destroyers might have. However, if you ever researched the new surface torpedo, then you could refit those destroyers (for a very small cost in time and IC) to the new torpedo. But you could avoid this cost, if you didn't need it.

For example, US destroyers in the Atlantic did not need a good surface torpedo attack, they were mostly chasing submarines, so you would put the latest in sonar, depth charges, radar, etc. on those DD's, but forget about researching the latest model of surface torpedo. The Americans could also skip the latest engines, so speed would suffer...not a problem if chasing submarines! The Japanese player, as I recall, got the Level 5 surface torpedo gifted right from the beginning of the game, and starting with his Level 3 destroyers he could always field the Type 93 "Long Lance" and have a torpedo attack of "5". They could then go and research the DD/CL tech "On-board Reloads" and "Night Optics" and boost their torpedo attack number even more up to "8" or even "10". (Note: these are not real HoI attack #'s, just for illustration!) Because of this you were very careful when confronted with Japanese light naval forces, as was historically true. Here is the Type 93 in action:

D+_41_.jpg


I used to love the Tech Tree in HoI-1, it was a lesson in History! But it was complex, and required a lot of micro-managing. Thus, they did away with it in HoI-2 and all subsequent versions of the game. But maybe, just maybe, there is a reason to put it back into the game, but only for the Naval features.

The mechanics are quite simple, really. You take the 10 basic stats of a ship, Sea Attack, Land Attack, Caliber, Range, Sea Defense (armor), Speed and so-on, and for each ship type and basic "class" (or really year and fundamental size and characteristic), you apply the value for that "tech" into the appropriate column under the named ship. If a later improved tech is researched, it can be added in at a cost. Once a technology out-grows a certain "class" of ship, those upgraded are no longer available. Achieving certain "levels" of ship required certain basics, such as hull size and starting engine...but after that they did not care too much. Thus, if you had a Level 3 Heavy cruiser, but you had not researched any guns since the Great War cruiser classes, you could still build an Level 3 Heavy cruiser with 5" or 6" inch guns (127mm or 153mm) instead of the standard 8" (203mm). Nothing to stop you, and the battle statistics would represent that choice!

Computers are extremely powerful these days and can easily take the extra load in managing some more data...and HoI-4 can always allow the player to switch on an "automatic" generic ship build if they want to avoid all of this. But it would be great for the enthusiast! HoI could also take the "real" stats, such as Nick3210 has developed, and say something like, would you like to build a ship equivalent to the "South Dakota" class? It could then take over the necessary research until it was complete.

Maybe like in the movies, we should go "Back to the Future"?
 
Last edited:

Rubidium

Field Marshal
49 Badges
Jul 7, 2011
5.909
12.044
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Tyranny - Bastards Wound
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Imperator: Rome
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • Age of Wonders: Planetfall - Revelations
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Tyranny - Tales from the Tiers
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • 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
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
It would take more than spies to get their hands on something that big, once they gain control of that areas, give them alot more chances to learn it. Spies on the otherhands are very low chances. When USSR took over Berlin, there were ballistic missiles like the V2 as well nuke somewhere around, or rumors? I know this can be pretty complex going in this directions, but it what really happen back then.
The German nuclear program was never seriously close to gaining a nuclear weapon, and their research was fatally flawed (plus the Western Allies ended up with most of the senior German scientists). When the German scientists (who were being held prisoner by the British) got word of the bombing of Hiroshima, they initially dismissed it as Allied propaganda (although they suggested it might have been a radium bomb) because they hadn't come anywhere close to developing such a weapon, so obviously the Americans couldn't have. The Soviets got essentially no useful information about nuclear weapons from them. What they did get was some uranium that they captured from the Germans (who in turn had mostly captured it from the Belgians).

The original Soviet nuclear program was almost entirely based on information they gathered from their numerous spies, who had pretty much completely penetrated the Manhattan Project. That gave them enough information to basically replicate the Allies' steps and copy their design. Obviously once they had reached that point, they could develop further nuclear weaponry on their own.
 

DJSixthSense

Sergeant
6 Badges
Dec 6, 2009
92
1
www.facebook.com
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Darkest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
I agree with the issues the OP adresses. But isn't HoI supposed to be an abstracted game in which every nation is weighed by the overall effectiveness of its armies in the WWII era? Perhaps some ships were better than the others, but on the other hand a ship that is less well-designed can outperform a better design by the virtue of its commanders, so it is really hard to make a ship on ship comparison anyways, because in order to do so one must balance all non-ship variables like the captain's skill in every field of naval tactics.

What matters is not the unit-by unit specs and their relative performance, but rather the overall performances of the armed forces including those units. If one pits the fleets of Italy vs the UK in the Med, does it matter that cruiser type x is slightly better compared to the opponent's type Y technically, if the battles still end up in a realistic win-loss ratio in the long run? That unit vs. unit performance is more a concern in wargames with an operational approach to battles rather than the broad strategic viewpoint of P.I. WWII games.

Perhaps this 1-on-1 specs standardisation of ships or other units idea would be very valuable though in case they ever come up with a mini game system to model actual combat operations on a smaller scale, and to pick important large battles in let's say a couple of provinces and all adjacent areas and enable us to fight them instead of abstracting them, if we want to.
 

RisingSun

Colonel
14 Badges
Mar 26, 2005
965
78
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Iron Cross
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
Well i dont want to argue anymore, since there already been few banned members. Just have to wait and see what happen when they release HoI4. One more thing, please make it easy to mod :)
 

Nick3210

Captain
1 Badges
Aug 7, 2013
459
292
  • Darkest Hour
Littorio has 9 guns * 1.33 shells per min = 12 shells
While Bismarck has 8 guns * 3 shells per min = 24 shells!

25 sec for one shot, not 20. 20 - only it theory.

To make true ship's classification without compromises is possible only if each nation will have its own ship line!
Yes, I think it would be good for HoI. And we will have excellent historicity in the characteristics of each ship.

But if we have not nation-specific ships we need compromises.

In all HoI games: King George V / Bismarck/ Littorio/ Richelieu classificated as one class! And I agree with this compromise.
Yes, in ALL HoI games Littorio is stronger than in reality.

You can make other table of classification - show it to us, it is interesting.
Where must be Littorio by your mind? Much lower, with Queen Elizabeth-class? OK, armour and fire power are approximately similar, but what about speed? Littorio is much faster, so I can't add Littorio in Queen Elizabeth-class.
Add Littorio in Bismarck-class, by my mind is the least evil of all.

Only if HoI will use separate national ship lines it will be possible do not use so large compromises and made most authentic ships.

But! Large compromises in classification by real ship's characteristicsis is much better than to made ships without taking into account real ship's characteristicsis.
For example, load HoI-3 and look at Deutschland and Hipper - they both have 203mm cannons and equival sea attack! :wacko:
Such epic mistakes should not be in HoI.
 
Last edited:

Alex_brunius

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Mar 24, 2006
22.404
5.017
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • War of the Roses
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Magicka 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Achtung Panzer
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • PDXCON 2017 Gold Ticket holder
  • Surviving Mars
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
But if we have not nation-specific ships we need compromises.

In all HoI games: King George V / Bismarck/ Littorio/ Richelieu classificated as one class! And I agree with this compromise.
Yes, in ALL HoI games Littorio is more stronger than in reality.

You can make other table of classification - show it to us, it is interesting.

I am guessing you did not play a game called Hearts of Iron 3?

Stats of these ships from the actual game:
Code:
Littorio
21 sea attack
19.50 KPH speed
1.80 Hull

King George V
19 sea attack
19.0 KPH speed
1.70 Hull

Bismarck
21 sea attack
19.0 KPH speed
1.80 Hull

Richelieu
21 sea attack
19.50 KPH speed
1.80 Hull

Interestingly enough we can se that the one with the lowest sea attack value is King George V, the same ship that the very indepth analysis I linked too rated as the one with the least amount of secondary battery anti ship firepower. About they main guns they also write:
"At the bottom of the spectrum, King George V's 14" gun clearly doesn't have nearly the oomph necessary to compete with the rest of these guys."


And it also scored lower on hull, for example the indepth analysis writes the following about King George Vs underwater protection:
"Shallow system, and not bounded at the top by an adequate deck protection, meaning that the explosive force of a hit was vented upward into the hull spaces. The worst system of the seven."

When it comes to speed in reality Bismarck and King George V were also the two slower ships, same deal in HoI3... again. Must be a coincidence?


Or perhaps Paradox did do their homework when it comes to Battleships and you just didn't bother to actually check?
 
Last edited:

Nick3210

Captain
1 Badges
Aug 7, 2013
459
292
  • Darkest Hour
I am guessing you did not play a game called Hearts of Iron 3?

Yes, I 4 times installed HoI-3, but deleted it immediately after the first ZOOM to a billion provinces :D
But I saw OOBs and ships in HoI-3.
Deutschland with 203mm cannons is a great success in "Paradox did do their homework".
(May be I am a strange man, but first what I look in a new HoI-games or HoI-mods is Deutschland and Hipper. Thus I
immediately conclude about the historicity of the implementation of Navy in game)

So, I made only one mistake, in HoI-3 King George V have lower sea attack = 19, but Littorio, Bismarck Richelieu have equival sea attack = 21.

So, in all HoI games Littorio, Bismarck and Richelieu are one class with equival sea attack, yes?

And what is your version - where must be Littorio, in what class it must be in?
 
Last edited:

Alex_brunius

Field Marshal
68 Badges
Mar 24, 2006
22.404
5.017
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • War of the Roses
  • 200k Club
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Pride of Nations
  • Magicka 2
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Achtung Panzer
  • Stellaris
  • Victoria 2
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • PDXCON 2017 Gold Ticket holder
  • Surviving Mars
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Cities in Motion
  • Cities in Motion 2
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Dungeonland
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • Majesty 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
Deutschland with 203mm cannons is great success in "Paradox did do their homework".

Do you think they should have the better "model 1938" main cannons instead?
Would that make sense for a ship that entered service in 1933?
Would it make sense for their following ships to not use the better model?


What I meant with "did do their homework" is that they researched the historical ships and tried to fit them into their system as good as possibly. As you yourself pointed out you can't ask that the system is changed to account for one or a small number of totally unique ships.

If you want even more accuracy there are several mods that have corrected things like these in different ways, some have the Panzershiffe as unique ship class, others change the guns.
 
Last edited:

Nick3210

Captain
1 Badges
Aug 7, 2013
459
292
  • Darkest Hour
Do you think they should have the better "model 1938" main cannons instead?
Would that make sense for a ship that entered service in 1933?
Would it make sense for their following ships to not use the better model?

Hipper is absolutley standart "early Washington's heavy cruiser" by his characteristicsis (2 lvl). It doesn't even "later armoured Washington's heavy cruiser" (3 lvl).
Year of construction is absolutely not important. If we will construct "early Washington's heavy cruiser" in 1945 year it will be the same "early Washington's heavy cruiser" with old low stats.
01.01.1936 Hipper must have progress under construction about 20%. And Deutschland already was constructed. But they are absolutley different ships by stats! 203 mm or 283 mm cannons is really big difference.