|
Kavak posted:Funny thing, I'm working on an event chain right now where whoever controls the right provinces after the war builds the Hoover Dam- depending on the regime, the name could be Boulder, Kaufmann (The architect), Reed, Jedediah Smith, and MacArthur. The last one gives you dissent instead of dropping it I get the Reed and MacArthur dam names, but which regimes/countries get the other names (assuming Jedediah Smith isn't an automatic PSA pick)?
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Boulder is a Democratic USA, Kaufmann's PSA (He did a lot of work in California, and it's part of them emphasizing their own identity), and Jedediah Smith's the AUS. They'd be big on old pioneers- nostalgic romanticism for the frontier era fits from both a nationalist and anti-socialist/urban perspective.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Boulder is a Democratic USA, Kaufmann's PSA (He did a lot of work in California, and it's part of them emphasizing their own identity), and Jedediah Smith's the AUS. They'd be big on old pioneers- nostalgic romanticism for the frontier era fits from both a nationalist and anti-socialist/urban perspective. Now you just need a name for when New England controls the provinces in question 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
PSA should also get the option to name it after Emperor Norton I.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:35
|
|
Grizzwold posted:PSA should also get the option to name it after Emperor Norton I. ...please tell me there's an option to make the PSA a monarchy with Emperor Norton II at the helm.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:PSA should also get the option to name it after Emperor Norton I. Norton proposed the Bay Bridge, not the dam. The Sandman posted:...please tell me there's an option to make the PSA a monarchy with Emperor Norton II at the helm. If I ever make a gag event chain for real, this will be it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Are you building any carriers? Although I guess there will not be a point with Japan turteling. Not at this point, though I would have if I had realized just how drat long they take.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Chief Savage Man posted:Not at this point, though I would have if I had realized just how drat long they take. If you need to cheese things for the narrative, build heavy cruisers with torpedo attachments. A fleet of nothing but them wrecks everything except submarines.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Chief Savage Man posted:Not at this point, though I would have if I had realized just how drat long they take. Personally I think it's worth modding ship construction times back to vanilla. It's absurd that even after researching the bonus to production time for naval units it still takes multiple years to build any at all, especially for Kaiserreich where the main wars will often have begun before a single one can be built.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
You mean Hearts of Iron II vanilla, because Darkest Hour Full is basically the same.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
ArchRanger posted:Personally I think it's worth modding ship construction times back to vanilla. It's absurd that even after researching the bonus to production time for naval units it still takes multiple years to build any at all, especially for Kaiserreich where the main wars will often have begun before a single one can be built. Except escort carriers which build faster than land divisions for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
The Sandman posted:...please tell me there's an option to make the PSA a monarchy with Emperor Norton II at the helm. Not II, Emperor Norton I. The once and future Emperor returns in America's hour of need.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 06:18
|
|
James Garfield posted:Except escort carriers which build faster than land divisions for some reason. Because historically late-war escort carriers took only about four months to go from being laid down to being launched, and then another month to be made battle-ready. By comparison, the Iowa took two years to go from being laid down to being launched, as did carriers. Of course, DH makes them take three or four years to build for whatever reason. I can't remember DH's numbers but cruisers generally took between one and two years to complete, both heavy and light, while destroyers took about as long as escort carriers and submarines between eight months and a year. I think that this is primarily because the real limiting factors on naval expansion aren't compatible with the DH engine, but it's a dumb fix.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
Kavak posted:You mean Hearts of Iron II vanilla, because Darkest Hour Full is basically the same. Yeah, sorry! I did mean HoI2 construction times. I so rarely play DH without Kaiserreich that it didn't occur to me to make the distinction since I prefer AoD for when I want the real-world WWII. ArchRanger fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Well the new version finally updated the tech teams to DH Full, maybe we can tweak build times? I don't know, it's kind of a balance issue at least on land, but realistic ship building times I can get behind.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:59
|
|
|
Adventure Pigeon posted:Not II, Emperor Norton I. The once and future Emperor returns in America's hour of need. This needs to happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
Um, what are you guys talking about? US with full hawk and the assembly line tech finishes an escort carrier in five months. An Iowa class BB takes exactly two years, carriers a little less. Cruisers take about one and a half year, while destroyers take about 8 months. Seems pretty historical to me.
Littlefinger fucked around with this message at 11:16 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 09:57
|
|
|
Full Hawk Lobby is hard to get, and what's feasible for WWII isn't in Kaiserreich. The assembly line tech doesn't activate until 1940, and most of the mod's wars are over by then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
The last Kaiserreich game I played (pre-new version) had a really good, multi-year WW2. I was the democratic Japanese, and after "peacefully" uniting Korea/Manchukuo/Transamur/China/rogue Australia, I joined the Entente around 1939 and we went to war with Germany (who had been victorious over France in Europe and white-peaced with UoB). I liberated India, set up Delhi to rule the subcontinent, then liberated Britain before starting to chip away at German continental dominance. It was 1946 and I had just landed in France before I ditched the save for the new version.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
USA starts with full hawk in the 1943 scenario and one move away by 1942 in both the '41 and '42 scenarios. It also has the tech ready when it enters the war. You are right, modulating the DH framework of build times to Kaiserreich makes a lot of sense. My point was that DH does translate mid-to-late WWII historical ship building times reasonably well. Except it does by taking into account how the game represents the technological and economic advancements of those years, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Full Hawk Lobby is hard to get, and what's feasible for WWII isn't in Kaiserreich. The assembly line tech doesn't activate until 1940, and most of the mod's wars are over by then. Yeah, is it me or is the war in Kaiserreich over way too quickly? Feels like people should be joining the alliances a lot faster. Now usually it's either Germany or France steamrolling the other and nothing else really happening.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 11:16
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:Yeah, is it me or is the war in Kaiserreich over way too quickly? Feels like people should be joining the alliances a lot faster. Now usually it's either Germany or France steamrolling the other and nothing else really happening. The post-game has always lacked content, but like I said a few pages back there shouldn't be a single defining war. What I would like to see happen is the International growing to deal with the Entente- CSA and its southern friends join to take down Canada and the Caribbean Federation, and Bhartiya attacks Delhi if it hasn't already. I can't really think of much else to do past ~1939, other than global revolution/counter-revolution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
Kavak posted:The post-game has always lacked content, but like I said a few pages back there shouldn't be a single defining war. Not trying to be pushy, but why not? What makes a WWII-analogue inappropriate for Kaiserreich?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Not trying to be pushy, but why not? What makes a WWII-analogue inappropriate for Kaiserreich? Kaiserreich, at least to me, has always been about the many small or not-so-small conflicts around the globe. A WWII between capitalist and socialist would overshadow all of them, and still potentially leave a lot of areas excluded (If Brazil doesn't go syndicalist, it's just the whole continent making GBS threads on Bolivia). I will admit one of the bigger obstacles is programming. Accounting for all the possibilities is nearly impossible with the myriad ways things can go in Kaiserreich, and they'd all require their own events and AI and so on. Maybe if more things can be left to the computer in Hearts of Iron IV, the late game can be fleshed out better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
Kavak posted:Kaiserreich, at least to me, has always been about the many small or not-so-small conflicts around the globe. A WWII between capitalist and socialist would overshadow all of them, and still potentially leave a lot of areas excluded (If Brazil doesn't go syndicalist, it's just the whole continent making GBS threads on Bolivia). I will admit one of the bigger obstacles is programming. Accounting for all the possibilities is nearly impossible with the myriad ways things can go in Kaiserreich, and they'd all require their own events and AI and so on. Maybe if more things can be left to the computer in Hearts of Iron IV, the late game can be fleshed out better. I'd personally like to see the community contribute a bit, as a lot of good ideas seem to get bandied about without anyone really doing much with them. For example, Nationalist France games have been much improved thanks to the custom events crafted by Antonine for his Lets Play on the Paradox forums.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
the iww-affiliated csa did not steal from the other americans i am proud of you csa
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Those events are funny at this stage in the game. Even without New England and the West coast, I'm drowning in resources and I'm already a top five industrial power so trading a dissent hit for supplies would be idiotic. I guess they're more compelling if you're in dire straits like we might have been in the Civil War if it had gone differently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
For me, the main draw of KR was always its replay value because almost every nation is viable and they all have their own events. It's okay to have a few very fleshed out years and then go back to having the game just be a blobbing simulator because there's enough content when playing other nations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Might be interesting to switch to a poorly-doing power? The Entente are still the good guys in this world, vs. commies and not-quite-yet-still-fascists. New England?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Ubern00b posted:Might be interesting to switch to a poorly-doing power? The Entente are still the good guys in this world, vs. commies and not-quite-yet-still-fascists. New England? At the risk of going back through the revolving door of this discussion: there's a really good case to be made that there are no good guys in the Kaiserreich world. This timeline is much, much more many-shades-of-grey than our own (with the exception of the Totalists/Baron von Sternberg-style National Populists, they're just legit badguys).
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Drone posted:At the risk of going back through the revolving door of this discussion: there's a really good case to be made that there are no good guys in the Kaiserreich world. This timeline is much, much more many-shades-of-grey than our own (with the exception of the Totalists/Baron von Sternberg-style National Populists, they're just legit badguys). Von Sternberg did nothing wrong!
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Ubern00b posted:Might be interesting to switch to a poorly-doing power? The Entente are still the good guys in this world, vs. commies and not-quite-yet-still-fascists. New England? Yeah those racist imperialist monarchies sure are the good guys when set against the modernising leftists, good analysis. Political snark aside, this LP isn't about challenge, it's about the narrative and the way CSM has been doing it he could probably create a compelling narrative out of the CSA encountering no resistance whatsoever in the rest of the LP. John Charity Spring fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:Yeah those racist imperialist monarchies sure are the good guys when set against the modernising leftists, good analysis. Well, they can be modernizing leftists. They can also be hideously oppressive Stalinist (RE: totalist) dictatorships run by secret police and state paranoia, which would certainly make them a lot less appetizing as good guys. This is, again, the thing about Kaiserreich - anyone can be the "good guy," anyone can be the "bad guy," or neither, or both, etc, in our historically biased democratic-leaning perspective on things. I agree though that it's a little skewed to automatically chalk up the communist stand-ins as bad guys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:Yeah those racist imperialist monarchies sure are the good guys when set against the modernising leftists, good analysis. The fun part is watching how it happens.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
I do wish they had a better flag though. Red and black just isn't doing it for me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Since the demise of the Soviets, only the TCSR (Georgia) are Totalist at the moment. Everybody else is Syndicalist or Radical Socialist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:I do wish they had a better flag though. Red and black just isn't doing it for me. Actually the CSA flag owns. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Eh, I'm more fond of the CoF and UoB flags personally. I guess it's just that the CSA flag looks like it could be used for anybody (which is probably the point, actually). How come the AUS gets four potential flags while the CSA has just the one anyway?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Grizzwold posted:
I dunno, someone made an event for them to choose a new flag- probably a good idea, the Eagle and Stripes seems prone to friendly fire incidents. The CSA flag is just the IWW's flag, just like the CNT-FAI flag- the union and the government are the one and the same, and that's the whole point. Erwin the German posted:Well, they can be modernizing leftists. They can also be hideously oppressive Stalinist (RE: totalist) dictatorships run by secret police and state paranoia, which would certainly make them a lot less appetizing as good guys. This is, again, the thing about Kaiserreich - anyone can be the "good guy," anyone can be the "bad guy," or neither, or both, etc, in our historically biased democratic-leaning perspective on things. Pretty much. Every faction, virtually every country, has equal potential for tyranny and liberty. Personal politics are going to color how you see things, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Kavak posted:Pretty much. Every faction, virtually every country, has equal potential for tyranny and liberty. Personal politics are going to color how you see things, of course. Speaking of which (and because I can't remember the events in question) what exactly is the AUS's path to anything other than tyranny? Are there specific events for it or is just a matter of not doing the most fascist option possible in the "after the war" events.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 00:58
|
|