when i go on the research tree it shows the years but not the technologies

You can't build battleships anymore. The mod takes out the ability to put the main gun on them. Or maybe its another mod that Im using, but it never happened till now.

The Nelson class of the Royal Navy has 2 rear and 1 front turret.
It should be 3 front none back. I saw other mods with the same problem maybe there is a bug in Hoi that doesnt allow for all foreward armament?

The Colorado class has a 3x3 one aft 2 foreward layout for its main guns. It should be 2x4 2-2gun turrets front and aft.

The Pennsylvania class has too much ships in it and they all have 283mm guns instead of 356mm, they have the same layout issue like the colorados.
Nevada and Oklahoma had 10 guns one 3 gun and one 2 gun turret front and aft. They need to be their own class.
The Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee class have 4 3 gun 356mm turrets same layout as the Colorado and Nevada classes.

The New York class had 10 356mm guns in 5 2 gun turrets, 2 foreward 1 midships 2 aft.
USS Arkansas has 6 2 gun 305mm gun turrets 2 foreward 2 midships and 2 aft.

I think the midship turrets arent a big problem. However for some ships I think the speed is far too low. I will continue with a more detailed overview later.


Last I have to say that the new ship editor is very nice and I hope you get the time and resources to improve it. Your version should have come from paradox at the start.

Originally posted by Nobody100:

The Nelson class of the Royal Navy has 2 rear and 1 front turret.
It should be 3 front none back. I saw other mods with the same problem maybe there is a bug in Hoi that doesnt allow for all foreward armament?

The Colorado class has a 3x3 one aft 2 foreward layout for its main guns. It should be 2x4 2-2gun turrets front and aft.

The Pennsylvania class has too much ships in it and they all have 283mm guns instead of 356mm, they have the same layout issue like the colorados.
Nevada and Oklahoma had 10 guns one 3 gun and one 2 gun turret front and aft. They need to be their own class.
The Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Tennessee class have 4 3 gun 356mm turrets same layout as the Colorado and Nevada classes.

The New York class had 10 356mm guns in 5 2 gun turrets, 2 foreward 1 midships 2 aft.
USS Arkansas has 6 2 gun 305mm gun turrets 2 foreward 2 midships and 2 aft.

I think the midship turrets arent a big problem. However for some ships I think the speed is far too low. I will continue with a more detailed overview later.


Last I have to say that the new ship editor is very nice and I hope you get the time and resources to improve it. Your version should have come from paradox at the start.

You are absolutely on point!

Thank you very much for pointing this out. I'll make sure to fix the issues you've mentioned in the next update.

Keep up the great work and hope you enjoy the mod!

Folow up to the great Navy stats post.
Maybe add 2 different armour shems distributed and all or nothing.
The later one is the armour sheme on all US BB post and including the nevada class.
The sheme was used on most of the BB that were build post 1936 in the US, UK and Japan, France and Germany used a distributed armou sheme and from all what I know the Sovietsky Soyus ships planned by the USSR didnt had an all or nothing armour sheme.
It concentrates most of the armour in the amoured citadell, other parts of the ship have at least splinter protection, while the distributed shemes tend to have thicker plates in other areas. The problem even in armour shemes there are differences between ship classes and nations. I think the best way to represent the benefits of the all or nothing sheme in Hoi would be to give it a speed bonus. The sheme mainly sves weight so a weacker machinery can be used to propell a ship with a distributed sheme provided the ship with distributed sheme doesnt has thinner armour.

Gun calibers:
5 in or 127 mm guns are used as secondarry guns the US BB and cruisers. Even today many western ships use one or two 5 in guns, they are also used on US DD as primary armament. Some use 3 in or 76 mm guns a caliber that was used in the 1920 and 30ss for AA work. The caliber comes back later in autoloaded AA guns and stayed until today.

Itry to represent what the ships had in 1936, especially light AA is difficult to get acurate information on. All the Standard type battleships i.e. Nevada to Colorado class had similar secondarry gun counts, I write them down for every class because I think it is better to work with.

USN BB secondary guns:
USS Nevada and USS Oklahoma (1936):
12x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x 5in/25 guns (dp gun)
8x4 1.1 inch light AA guns (28 mm) (chicago piano)
first with all or nothing armour sheme in USN

USS Pennsylvania and USS Arizona
12x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x 5in/25 guns (dp gun)
8x .50cal machine guns

USS New Mexico, USS Misissipi and USS Idaho
12x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x 5in/25 guns (dp gun)
8x .50cal machine guns

USS Tennessee and USS California
12x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x 5in/25 guns (dp gun)
8x .50cal machine guns or 11 -1.1 inch (28 mm) light AA guns (maybe both)
and 2 53,3 cm underwarter torpedotubes (removed in 1937)

USS Colorado, USS Maryland and USS Westvirginia
12x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x 5in/25 guns (dp gun)
8x .50cal machine guns or 11 -1.1 inch (28 mm) light AA guns (maybe both)

USS New York and USS Texas
16x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x3 in/50 guns (dp gun)
Texas god 2 x4 1.1 inch light AA guns (28 mm) (chicago piano) I think New York could have got something similar.

USS Arkansas

16x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x3 in/50 guns (dp gun)

If you want to be realy nerdy you could includ USS Wyoming.
She is the sister of USS Arkansas and got converted into a training ship in 1935.
Her main armament was 3x 12 in guns 2 foreward one aft.
Secondarry:
16x 5 in/51 guns (no dp gun)
8x3 in/50 guns (dp gun)

There was a problem with the technology of early cruisers. After the completion of research and development, there was no armor layout technology. As a result, some countries did not have cruiser technology at the beginning, and were unable to design cruisers after research and development.

Next Stat Post for the Navy:
In this Edition I go over the Battleships of Britains Royal Navy
As with US Navy I will only treat the legacy ships build before 1936, the post 1936 ships will follow later because with 1936 start they are the most important factor. Ship designs like the G3 design will be dealt with in the same post.
Lets start the with the newest ships in 1936 the Nelsons:
HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney

6x 2 6in (152 mm) (no dp) guns on the back, maybe the slots for the rear main battery can be used to put them in
8x 1 4.7 in guns (120mm) (dp gun) (some sources say Rodney had only 6 but for stardazition pourpouses I think both should have the same number)
For the light AA 8 single 40mm 2pdr guns
2 24.5 in torpedotubes (will be retained during the whole 2nd World War)
they had an all or nothing armour sheme

Revenge class

HMS Revenge, HMS Resolution, HMS Royal Oak, HMS Royal Sovereign and HMS Ramiles
In 1936 all of the ships seemed to have 12x1 6in guns ( no dp gun).
For Royal Sovereign and Ramillies 8x2 4 in gun.
Resolution, Revenge and Royal Oak had 4x2 4 in guns
Royal Oak and Resolution also had her 2 underwater 53,3cm torpedotubes removed by 1937 (I am not shure if they had them in 1936.) but I think it isnt realy worth it to include them because they were removed later anyway. Mainly to delete a flodding hazard and to make room for other things.

Queen Elizabeth Class contains HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Warspite, HMS Valiant, HMS Barham and HMS Malaya.

HMS Warspite was In modernization which ended in 1937.
After the modernization the ship had
8x1 6in guns ( no dp guns)
4x2 4 in guns ( dp guns)
Light AA 4x8 4cm and 4x4 12.7cm machine guns.

The other ships had 12x1 6in guns (no dp) and 4x1 4 in guns (dp).

Hoever the Queen Elizabeth and Vilant went into refit in 1937and came out with 10x2 4.5 in (114mm) (dp) guns. The 4.5 in had various iterations afterwards and now serves the Royal navy as gun armament for the Type 45 destroyers. the light AA was 4x8 4cm and 26x2 20m guns.

Barham only got the single 4 in mounts replaced by twin 4 in mounts.
She was also the only ship of the Queen Elizabeth class that had her underwater torpedotubes left in 1937.

Malaya had no mayor reconstructions.

Now the Battlecruisers HMS Hood, HMS Renown and HMS Repulse.

HMS Repulse in 1936 had

4x3 4 in guns (no dp gun)
8x1 4 in guns (dp gun)
light AA guns were 2x8 4cm guns

Renown went into reconstruction in 1936. The reconstruction was similar to the Queen Elizabeth and Valian in terms of secundarry guns i.e. 10x2 4.5 in guns and 3x8 4cm guns.

For both Renown and Repulse the Main armament were 6x2 15 in guns 2 foreward one aft.

HMS Hood

had 12x1 5.5 inch (14cm) (no dp) guns
and 4x1 4 inch (dp) guns
2x8 4cm as light AA

When I refit ships they suffer a production penalty from lack of resources despite having enough, i also get the tooltip at the top of my screen saying the same thing, when i hover over the tooltip it says i am missing "PRODUCTION_MATERIALS_(5)"

Great mod, but some small things I noticed:

1. Currently, the second snorkel technology does nothing (you get the first one for free, and the first tech unlocks the second one.)

2. The most modern model of jet carrier naval bomber is treated like a non-jet carrier naval bomber. (I haven't tested the other models.)

3. Some destroyer modules (like hull shape, iirc) that should probably be mandatory are optional.

4. Balance-wise, I think subs are even more OP in this mod than in the base game. It's possible to make submarines with sub visibility that is so low, they're essentially unsinkable (at least against the AI.) Give them a deck gun and you can take out entire fleets on "always engage." This would be even worse if you did add a third snorkel level.

5. Tank upgrades do not reflect the reduced resource requirements in the latest patch.

6. Slat armor shows a black icon in the tank designer.

7. A few naval guns (iirc, some of the deck guns for subs) are missing localization.

The next Navy Post.

This time its about the Battleships of the Imperial Japanese Navy.
As in the other navy post I will only treat the legacy ships that exist in 1936.

First the Ships of the Kongo-class.

Kongo herself:

8-14 in guns in 4x2 turrets

16-6in casemate guns single mounts
8-5 inch guns 8-2 mounts (dp guns)

3 Aircraft

4 submerged 21 in torpedotubes ( sources disagree when they were removed so it would be best to not include them)

Hiei

was a training ship until november 1936

she had only 6-14 in guns in 3x2 turrets

after her refit she got her forth main battery turret and her secondary armament back

after the refit she had

8-14 in guns in 4x2 turrets

16-6in casemate guns single mounts
8-5 inch guns 8-2 mounts (dp guns)

and some 10x2 25mm AA guns ( a similar number seems to have been on the other Kongos)

The Refit lasted until 1940.
Haruna was had the same armament as Kongo,same goes for Kirishima.

Fuso-class ( Yamashiro and Fuso):

12 14 in guns in 6x2 turrets

14- 6in casemet guns

8x2 5 in (dp guns)

16 25mm AA guns

3 Aircraft

Ise-class:

both Ise and Hyuga were in refit in 1936.

Hyuga came out of refit in september 1936. Ise in March 1937.

Both had 12-14 in guns in 6x2 turrets.

16 5,5 in guns in casemet guns

8 5 inch dp guns in 4x2 mounts

20- 25mm guns

Nagato class:

both were in refit at teh beginning of 1936.

Nagato until January and Mutsu until September.

their main Armament were 8 16in guns in 4x2 turrets

18 5.5 in guns in casemet guns

8 5 in guns in 4x2 mounts (dp guns)

20 25mm AA guns

Researching Support Equipment 2 glitches the espionage mechanics. After researching it, neither newly produced Support Equipment 1 nor Support Equipment 2 satisfy the equipment requirement for operations to commence.

Originally posted by Bring the Jubilee!:

Researching Support Equipment 2 glitches the espionage mechanics. After researching it, neither newly produced Support Equipment 1 nor Support Equipment 2 satisfy the equipment requirement for operations to commence.

Just a theory, but maybe this is happening because support equipment isn't classified like infantry equipment. For operations that require infantry equipment, all versions of infantry equipment count as "infantry_equipment" and so satisfy the prerequisites. But, maybe your modification to support equipment doesn't account for this? Perhaps support equipment 2 doesn't satisfy the "support_equipment" requirements for operations? I don't know why this would prevent old equipment being used in operations, though, unless this somehow screws up the game logic.

Originally posted by Bring the Jubilee!:

Originally posted by Bring the Jubilee!:

Researching Support Equipment 2 glitches the espionage mechanics. After researching it, neither newly produced Support Equipment 1 nor Support Equipment 2 satisfy the equipment requirement for operations to commence.

Just a theory, but maybe this is happening because support equipment isn't classified like infantry equipment. For operations that require infantry equipment, all versions of infantry equipment count as "infantry_equipment" and so satisfy the prerequisites. But, maybe your modification to support equipment doesn't account for this? Perhaps support equipment 2 doesn't satisfy the "support_equipment" requirements for operations? I don't know why this would prevent old equipment being used in operations, though, unless this somehow screws up the game logic.

I MAY have fixed it by recommisioning old support equipment and refunding the operation.

why does mexico not have new planes or electric tech?

Originally posted by Radical_Plunger:

why does mexico not have new planes or electric tech?

How are you even still playing the mod? It's been outdated for years.