|
Base strike allows you to go up to 6 carriers? I've always heard that base strike's carrier overcrowding tech refers to deck space instead of number of carriers.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
Danann posted:Base strike allows you to go up to 6 carriers? I've always heard that base strike's carrier overcrowding tech refers to deck space instead of number of carriers. iirc its the same modifier, every carrier you add over the 4th adds a non-trivial amount of mission efficiency loss for all planes in the fleet just like going over the deck limit on a single CV does, so the doctrine lets you bring along extra boats along with their airwings for a net-0% loss on mission efficiency
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
i was just thinking that so far all we've seen of naval stuff from the new dlc is very reactive. like the most recent dev diary described how a small patrol runs into an enemy and then signals a task force to come and help. i wonder if they're going to add something equivalent to battle plans but for fleets. for example, if japan wants to simultaneously invade every island in the western pacific, they should probably have to plan out in some detail what all their fleets are going to do, who's going to sweep mines where, which warships are going to cover which troop transports, that kind of thing. the current invasion planning system for armies sorta represents this but i would think that those operations also required a lot of fleet planning that currently isn't represented at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:i was just thinking that so far all we've seen of naval stuff from the new dlc is very reactive. like the most recent dev diary described how a small patrol runs into an enemy and then signals a task force to come and help. i wonder if they're going to add something equivalent to battle plans but for fleets. for example, if japan wants to simultaneously invade every island in the western pacific, they should probably have to plan out in some detail what all their fleets are going to do, who's going to sweep mines where, which warships are going to cover which troop transports, that kind of thing. the current invasion planning system for armies sorta represents this but i would think that those operations also required a lot of fleet planning that currently isn't represented at all. The IJN should give penalties to Japanese invasions as the admirals do everything they can to make the IJA look like incompetents.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:iirc its the same modifier, every carrier you add over the 4th adds a non-trivial amount of mission efficiency loss for all planes in the fleet just like going over the deck limit on a single CV does, so the doctrine lets you bring along extra boats along with their airwings for a net-0% loss on mission efficiency That's not what the doctrine does. The doctrine reduces the penalty you get for putting too many planes on an individual carrier. Nothing reduces the penalty for bringing too many carriers to a fight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 10:22
|
|
|
Gort posted:That's not what the doctrine does. The doctrine reduces the penalty you get for putting too many planes on an individual carrier. Nothing reduces the penalty for bringing too many carriers to a fight. Hmm, in my opinion, the other way is better. I mean, from a busywork perspective. That's what I usually think about in this game. It's easier to just start putting 6 carriers in a fleet, than it is to go back to all your carriers and change their airwings. Which I'm pretty sure you'd have to do individually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Seems like a good time for this question, do the air wings of carriers automatically participate in any naval battle the carrier is caught in or do you have to manually assign them? It would seem loving insane to not have them automatically assist in the naval battle but, hey, this is hearts of iron
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
yes they automatically participate once the CV has actually "entered" the battle. you can also assign the planes to do missions from the CV
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
I think there's also a little checkbox somewhere that you can use to tell them to either follow the carrier around, or continue doing a mission that you gave them by jumping to a suitable airbase. If you gave them a mission through the air mode map.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
the new KR patch rules, the 2nd american civil war has gone on for 3 years and shows no sign of slowing down lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
btw to clarify the new KR update does not in fact mess with the naval doctrine tree but it does have a completely new ship tree
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
jesus
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
in case anyone was wondering yes each of those ships takes roughly as long (~200 days) to research as the regular ship techs from regular HoI4 except there are twice as many of them
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
Good on KR for making naval so undesirable that no one will even think of trying it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
who the gently caress looked at the base game and decided the real shortcoming in the navy system was that there just wasn’t enough ships like is this not the entire point of the variant system? To avoid clusterfucks like that
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:who the gently caress looked at the base game and decided the real shortcoming in the navy system was that there just wasn’t enough ships Also the capital ship techs are gated behind a "Naval Infrastructure Decision" requirement which playing as Mexico for an hour or two last night I was unable to find for the life of me
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Didn't you guys hear? More is always better, in all things. I hope they added not only escort carriers, but corvettes, torpedo boats, and seven hundred convoy ship variants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Gort posted:Didn't you guys hear? More is always better, in all things. Every boat used at Dunkirk has an individual tech to research
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
tbh the boat tech tree in default hoi4 isn't very good either
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
it’s not but this is a million times worse
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
iirc, the point was to try and balance the various navies against each other by giving, like, Germany later versions of ships without giving them modern ships. but lmao at whatever this all is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
"Yeah we used those extra four weeks to ensure that you never want to bother with building boats. The Caribbean rework had to be sacrificed for this."
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:"Yeah we used those extra four weeks to ensure that you never want to bother with building boats. The Caribbean rework had to be sacrificed for this." well who's going to want to play any nation that doesn't spend most of the game landlocked after seeing that
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Davincie posted:tbh the boat tech tree in default hoi4 isn't very good either more of a poo poo thing is worse than less of a poo poo thing More seriously, I do think the entire philosophy of the Hearts of Iron tech tree (and many other games tech trees) is flawed. You shouldn't be able to only research and build light cruisers, for example, and end up with extremely powerful 1944-era light cruisers but not know what a good destroyer would look like. There's not really a simple solution to the problem of overspecialisation - maybe each ship class you research should give you a bonus to research another ship class? The issue is that once you have one high-tech type of something - a tank, or a plane, or a ship - researching another type of that thing has a diminished value to the player, but it still costs just as much as researching the original thing, so you don't bother. As a result, you lose stuff that happened in reality - Germany doesn't research or build tactical bombers and battleships, it just builds CAS and submarines. Britain doesn't bother with anything except fighters, since it can research those extremely well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
instead of researching individual kinds of gear have all research be into things like improved components and design philosophy so you unlock things in batches like instead of going from light tank 2 to medium tank one, go from interwar tank design, that gets you light tanks and heavy tanks to early war design that gives you mediums and improved lights and heavys then lets you decide which ones are most worth the cost to use. ironically infanty gear pretty much does this, it just lumps all your pixeltruppens stuff under one thing you assign factories to instead of keeping it separate like my example does. this also makes the think how weird it is that all my dudes get improved machineguns and mortars instantly while handing out SMG's is a massive years long undertaking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
wasn't that HoI3's tech system
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
I think it would be useful to have both basic technologies and types derived from them, but one you have all the tech types required, the specific ship, plane, tank, etc should just be a 30- or 60-day effort, which could be reduced by doctrines and/or focus trees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:wasn't that HoI3's tech system It's been a while since I played HoI 3 but a big problem was you still had discreet light/medium/heavy tank technology, but now there were 4 per type of tank because you researched armor, gun, engine and reliability separately.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
tbh the magic fix to tech would probably just make it so that a all tech unlocks at the given year, potentially one back, and you research to be ahead and hip and cool
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:tbh the magic fix to tech would probably just make it so that a all tech unlocks at the given year, potentially one back, and you research to be ahead and hip and cool What, so China has the same tech as the US except for a couple of outliers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
have a flat, uncontrollable amount of research that unlocks everything old, and more impactful specific techs you pursue it would make the research boosts in focus trees much less necessary to create situations where countries have specific signature advancements, since that would be the whole purpose of making choices in the tech tree
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:have a flat, uncontrollable amount of research that unlocks everything old, and more impactful specific techs you pursuely I mean honestly, with this approach you might as well ditch tech trees entirely and then see research more as a way to give yourself temporary bonuses. Everyone has the same base stats, but you invested in better small arms research so your infantry get better attack values for a while until the rest of the world catches up to you and your technology is now just "average" again. I feel like people would probably hate this though, because it wouldn't give them that same sense of forward progress that a more straightforward tech tree does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
Gort posted:What, so China has the same tech as the US except for a couple of outliers? i mean, i guess sure it comes down to more actually having the means to produce it then anything else in reality, anyway
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
You get a 20% research bonus for something that you're getting a licensed production for. Just do something like that for items that are behind the times and are connected to tech you already have. If I have fighters 1944 and its 1943, give a 20% bonus to CAS 1940. Or like, anything on the same page even. Or with boats you get the bonus for tech one row below and above, besides submarines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:instead of researching individual kinds of gear have all research be into things like improved components and design philosophy so you unlock things in batches Raskolnikov38 posted:wasn't that HoI3's tech system I think that was HOI2's tech system
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:in case anyone was wondering yes each of those ships takes roughly as long (~200 days) to research as the regular ship techs from regular HoI4 except there are twice as many of them Maybe it varies from country to country and I've only played 8.0 for like an hour but this is not true. Escort ships seem to take like 90-100 days whereas battleships and carriers take 200-300
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I mean honestly, with this approach you might as well ditch tech trees entirely and then see research more as a way to give yourself temporary bonuses. Everyone has the same base stats, but you invested in better small arms research so your infantry get better attack values for a while until the rest of the world catches up to you and your technology is now just "average" again. it is a more realistic take on the WWII arms race, though, one which better reflects the reactive nature of arms development. it isn't just that a more advanced plane or tank or rifle performs better than lower-tech alternatives, but it also enables new ways of fighting that both go above and beyond the superior physical properties of the weapon itself. on the other hand, that advantage diminishes over time, as even technologically-inferior enemies learn to adapt. it eliminates the "develop 1944 tanks/planes ASAP, stop forever" model that HOI4 currently has, and forces you to constantly work to keep an edge. it also makes your decisions more impactful, rather than "oh poo poo i forgot to research transports" or the huge boring catchup tech sinks
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:it is a more realistic take on the WWII arms race, though, one which better reflects the reactive nature of arms development. it isn't just that a more advanced plane or tank or rifle performs better than lower-tech alternatives, but it also enables new ways of fighting that both go above and beyond the superior physical properties of the weapon itself. on the other hand, that advantage diminishes over time, as even technologically-inferior enemies learn to adapt. Yeah, I should clarify that I didn't think the thing I said in my post was actually a bad idea - just an interesting thing that players would instinctively reject because it doesn't feel the same as how they think technological development should feel. Even though it would just be a more explicit depiction of how the mechanics already work out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
You could use the current artillery tree as an example of something in between, where you research the main weapon platform, then research improvements that benefit all models, such as better ammunition or optics. Something similar could work for tanks, where you need to unlock medium tanks, then the rest of the "medium" tree is different types of upgrades, such as armor improvements. Make them particularly expensive to research, then allow boosting of research with military experience. Kinda like what they are planning for ships.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
drat, the new CSA in KR is such a fairytale land of fully automated gay luxury space communism its kinda funny
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 04:28
|
|
