Paradox Games

Is it just me, or does Man the Guns really tilt things in the Axis' favor? I don't think I've had a game yet where China didn't get steamrolled, North Africa was largely uncontested, and the Soviet Union didn't crumble like tissue paper.

Ok, can someone please tell me how the fuck ship-designing works in MTG?

Edited by theLibrarian on Mar 12th 2019 at 10:01:34 AM

The medium length version:

You start off with one of five hull types: Destroyer, Cruiser, Heavy Ship, Carrier, Submarine. Each generation of hull has an increased number of equipment slot, and the equipment you can install also varies by ship classification. Carriers don't have catapult aircraft, for example.

In addition, the three first hull types also have a gun caliber associated with them. Destroyers can only carry small-caliber ship guns and AA. Cruisers can carry up to medium-caliber ship guns, but if they do, they get classified as Heavy Cruisers and become capital ships instead of screenjng vessels. Battleships can carry heavy or super-heavy batteries. You can install gun modules everywhere on a ship that isn't taken up by a specialised module, but it's probably not a great idea.

You also have fixed modules dedicated to things other than firepower, things like fire control systems, radar (for spotting surface threats) or sonar (for spotting submarines), the engine, and the armor protection on the ship. In addition, most ship types have modules for doing specialist tasks, like spotting aircraft, minelayers, minesweepers, depth charges for anti-submarine warfare and so. These help ships deal with dedicated non-combat tasks, but are often best used on specialist ships rather than dedicated support ships for your task forces, bar maybe the sonar and depth charges. Each module you add, whether it's a gun battery or a sonar, has a production cost associated with it. So sometimes it might not even be worth having a ships sporting guns like a porcupine if they're going to get blasted to smithereens.

Okay, sometimes I wonder who came up with the formation decisions and their requirements in HOI4.

Why do I need bloody North Africa to form Arabia, but not Oman and Yemen?

Actually making a minor mod to change that right now.

Okay. I've been playing Equestria At War and most of my ship design options are unbuildable because of a lack of the right modules. I assume this means that I have to be searching all the calibers and whatnot along with the main hull designs.

Or it means you haven't installed one of the core ship modules. Usually you need to fill out certain modules (usually your ship's primary gun batteries, engines and some other stuff I can't quite remember) before it's considered a valid design.

You also need enough navy XP similar to army divisions needing army XP.

Can I still build battle carriers? Or can I replicate the I-400 series submarine yet?

Also like, how would people say the exansion is, is it worth the money like it looks?

I assume that by 'battle carriers' you mean carriers with a large capacity for aircraft? If so, then yes.

I don't think you can replicate the I-400 class, but I also haven't tried.

As for whether or not it's worth the dosh, it's going to depend a lot on what you want to do with it. It adds some nice naval features, but it can be very confusing and overwhelming at first glance, and it takes some getting used to. The new focuses for the US and UK are nice, but the exiled governments feature is kind of perfunctory, and a lot of the other systems are just sorta...there.

Also, the fascists have an easier time locking down mainland Europe now, I find. It might just be that I'm building bad marine divisions and not giving them enough shore support, but they just seem like they have a way easier time resisting naval invasion.

Edited by math792d on Mar 14th 2019 at 4:50:07 PM

I hear there is a Masters of Universalis tournament coming up soon.

I think Imca meant things like the Ise and Hyuga, battleship/carrier hybrids.

To which I believe the answer was no, however there is a mod for it on the workshop.

I do mean like Ise, looks like I will have to find that mod then.

As for naval, I do a lot of comunist Japan so that would probaly be apreciated.... did they ever fix it so naval battles were less... crushing, and less AI cheaty?

Sorry.

The new system makes it much more of a battle of attrition/a matter of knowing proper force composition than just brute forcing battleships.

Glad to hear, I hope we get something similar focusing on airplanes (while I hear they are op, there is very little feedback that they are working making them feel weak) in the future, but for now I will grab this. Thanksies.

The main current bug is that carriers tend to stalemate each other, even if there's a large tech disparity or one side has far more fighters than the other (basically, bomber disruption is incredibly effective, even without air superiority). OTOH, if one side has carriers and the other doesn't, they're devastating.

RE: BBV, I don't think anyone actually wanted them IRL. My understanding is that Japan actually planned to do a full CV conversion, but didn't have the time or resources to do it in one go, so there was a three-phase plan to eventually convert Ise and Hyuuga to carriers, but they never got past the first phase of the conversion.

As for I-400, I guess it depends on if you can give subs some spotter planes, but they don't really have any business trying to actually act as full carriers and having them contribute to the carrier soft-cap of a fleet wouldn't be great outside of very small operations.

They were intended to be mostly converted, but keep the foward two deck guns, the second stage would have ate the middle two, and the third the super structure.

Though really I don't mind that they weren't like desired IRL, since this is alternate history any way I don't see much reason I can't do a what if.

Carrier soft cap though?

If you have more than 4 carriers in a fleet, they get a stacking penalty of -20% mission efficiency per carrier over 4 until you hit an 80% penalty. This is regardless of how many planes each carrier actually brings to the party or anything else.

That's kinda dumb, it should be plane count based to give light carriers and escort carriers a use.

Escort carriers have never been modeled and the use of light carriers (which it's worth noting mostly fell out of favor as the war went on) is mostly that they're cheap and can be assigned to fleets that aren't supposed to engage in pitched battles, such as helping with convoy escorting.

And the idea is that as you add more carriers, it takes longer to form up into a coherent strike force and it becomes harder to figure out what the correct carrier to land on is when you return.

In light of recent events the Paradox subreddit is starting to crack down on "remove kebab" and other racist memes.

Well, its good they finally started doing that, but its the reason for it is really horrific and depressing

Took them fucking long enough. They should've been removed before this shitshow happened.

Yeah, I can see how "Remove Kebab" can be seen as racist, even if it's just a meme about how much of an annoyance the Ottomans are.

The meme's originally based on the Bosnian genocide.

Edited by DrunkenNordmann on Mar 15th 2019 at 4:41:46 PM

Ah. I didn't know that part.

Yeah, I didn't either before the atrocity at Christchurch. I thought it was just a EU 4 funny. Feeling kinda shitty about that now.