Question: Carrier Stacking
Penalty on Sortie Efficiency (per carrier above 4): 20% → 5%

Why did you did this? It favors the "super-stack" flottila fights even more. I would do the opposite!

Not at the moment. I'm taking a break from HOI4.

Got an update on the way? Your mod is crashing with 1.3.3.

@Bridger - is there a fix in this mod for the bug in the original Expanded States mod? IIRC it has been fixed in that mod (it's called hotfix1 now), but I'm not sure if it's also in this mod

pls implement this http://steamproxy.net/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=832398441 :)

Bridger, my group that runs pretty big games every Sunday has ran into a problem we'd like you to write a small event chain for. So when the Japanese take 'Southern Expansion' they get a Non-Aggression Pact with the Soviets, except the Soviets get no say in the matter. I've dug through the National Focus files for all of the majors and 'Southern Expasion' for Japan is the only one that has 'relation = non_aggression_pact' for any country so it look's like Paradox just got lazy. For Molotov-Ribbentrop they have an event chain that gives the player/AI options to accept or decline.

We are working on doing a house rule for the importance of NAP's but it doesn't address the fact that the Soviets just get stuck with this NAP they may or may not want.

@yossarian: I'll need to play a bit more with the naval game to get a better feel for the balance. I agree that Subs don't feel as strong as they should be in the early game.

@Garga: there are already disincentives to adding tank destroyers to marines (lower amphib bonus) but DD tanks did exist at D-Day. Do you think the penalty for armored amphibious invasions is too low? I'm honestly pretty convinced that tanks are neccessary in amphib invasions atm. It's far too easy to stop them otherwise (you're stuck with only 80 combat width, which makes it very hard to penetrate a decent defender).

As for artillery, you're trading firepower for organization. Do you think it's not a big enough tradeoff? Do you find 6 arty / 2 inf to be an effective fighting force? In addition, armor is a pretty hard counter to artillery, and they did buff the "hardness" stat on many of the armor/mech/mot units in last patch which was a direct nerf to arty.

Bridger, would you be able to tweak/balance the naval aspect of the game? For example buffing subs and nerfing early destroyers

I want to find a way to disallow some overly efficient and absurd combinations as strapping tank destroyers to marines and mountaneers or having more than 2 line artillery brigades per 10 combat width, these are very common house rule.

@Garga I do not know of any easy way to do that, and it would not be my choice either. Flat restrictions are boring compared to providing the proper costs to certain strategies.

What exactly do you find to be problematic about Artillery?

I was examining your mod and I am wondering if you have looked into the possibility of limiting the use of line artillery per combat width (disallowing space marines). I don't see anything in units/*.txt that could be easily adapted? Do you have an idea if scripting is allowed in units/*?

would be nice to see some minister rebalance. It makes no sense to me that only one major on the on one side has acces to both the normal inf guys + the commando guy. i think italy for example has only acces to +5%def army guy and the lowest inf high command +5%atk+10%def. wich both cost full price. madness. the nerf you made to PP makes those megar choises even more dirty than they already are.

Cheers Varvs

@Kovic, that is true. I was running out of time and had ye tot come up with a good solution for China. It can't be allowed to so easily join the Axis via any of the options i had, which is also why I removed the "Puppet China" focus. I plan to revisit the issue and come up with something that works better.

@Varvs, yeah, that was the reasoning for that. Based on all the improvements to the subject system. With the DLC, the UK can now copy templates from a subject, alter it, and recruti using their manpower directly in that subject. This gives them access to the manpower of their subjects, which is what those small boosts were designed to represent.

Unfortunately i have to assume that since this is a multiplayer mod, *somebody* invovlved in the multiplayer game will have the DLC. Only the host has to have it in order for everyone to benefit.

Having ministers costs vary based on their skill is an interesting idea, i'll need to look into that. I also want to adjust some of the minister's bonuses to make them more appealing.

You standardised all the Befriend/Coerce/Alliance focuses... Except Befriend China. It still only removes advisors and gives an opinion boost. Is this a bug or a feature?

so i noticed you removed the little manpower buffs uk got from developing the commonwealth. was your reasoning that now with the dlc the uk has access to their manpower?
I do not have the dlc.
btw did you ever thought about adjusting the PP prices of ministers on base of their skill lvl? getting the specialists as italy for meager +5%/+10% inf guy for full 150 pp feels just wrong to me. how about genius guys cost 200 and specialists just 100 or even less pp.

Cheers Varvs

and keep up the good work.

damm i love the better air regions. no more mad himalaya airzone thts split into 3 parts but still one zone. Very nice!

Sorry, after posting I found out that there is a bug in the 1.3 patch which causes a crash for certain mods. The 1.31 beta hotfix patch fixes this. You can get it by right clicking on your HOI4 game in the steam library, go to properties, then to the 'betas' tab and go to the 1.3.1 hotfix beta.

or wait until next week, I'm sure it will be released as an official hotfix patch by then.

This mod makes the game crash, but I don't know why.

Does adding -debug give me an error log with crashes on loading?

Mod has been updated for 1.3.1 (the hotfix patch) with quite a lot of changes. Please examine the new Unified Changelog.

I will be updating this by Saturday to work with 1.3

I always use the No Man's Land mod when we play multiplayer games, and I believe I'm going to incorporate the "More Strategic Regions" mod in the next version. Some of the strategic regions in the game are so huge that only strategic bombers have enough range to operate without a penalty. It's pretty absurd.

Those are the only checksum-altering mods we play MP with. I also use UI Overhaul (fixed) and a few other graphcial mods.

Hi Bridger In Description can you include suggested mods that play well with this or simply mods you play with along with this mod? I am playing several mods and switch back and forth with a group of mods changing before play with this mod Id like to practice before jumping into an MP game

Right you are, great!

@Yossarian: The most recent version of the mod does that already. The plain "Air Innovations" now gives generic doctrine bonus, and the two under it give either Battlefield Support on one side or "Tactical" on the other (why they bothered giving "Strategic" for germany, i don't know). Then air innovations 2 gives generic air doctrine bonuses. This at least gives germany the choice between battlefield support and tactical, which I think are the two they are most likely to want.

@Bridger, how do you feel about standardising NF so that they give you a generic doctrine bonus, rather than a bonus for specific doctrine? For example, changing Air Innovations to give Germany general air doctrine bonuses, rather than Battlefield Support bonuses. I think this could be done with balance and variety in mind

A single player version would be awesome, if someone would be willing to do it.

@Bridger and @Varvs - good call, thanks!

ya i thin if would try it the other way around. and remove the nf from expert ai 2.0 and keep the PS ones.

It's worth noting, however, that such a version will have problems. I'm changing some of the tension requirements on the national focuses because my mod tends to reduce tension generation by a lot of the normal early sources to create a more even curve.

It's easy to delete certain sections of a mod. Open up your HOI4/Mods folder, and start opening up all the "blahblahblah.mod" files in notpad. Once you find the one with the name Perfect Storm, look at the line that says something like: G:\\Steam\\steamapps\\workshop\\content\\394360\\699397350. Navigate to this folder, unzip the contents, delete all the files in /common/national_focus and then zip it back up and replace the one you just changed.

I'll look into uploading a version without national focuses along with the next update.

@Varvs, I also use the Expert AI mod and was hoping Bridger would check it out and maybe make a more compatible version of this mod? Maybe without the new NF for example

so i quite enjoy the better ai mod 2.0. it forces the ai to build okay divisions and reasonable productions. sadly its not working smoothly with PS, NF merge wierdly. so the general NF tree gives like doublle manpower oO.

also i like the PP nerv you made.

It went well. I've been playing as USA, and the extra PP crunch is certainly interesting to deal with. I have been trying to tune the tension values so that it only hits 100% when fascists wind up going to war with both the west *and* the USSR, but it hit 100% way before that (we're at 160% and the Comintern isn't even involved yet) so I'll be further turning that in the future.

I got some great data from this game and I expect it will continue to improve the next version.

so how did it go on your saturday game. how was it?

There are other, arguably more valuable ministers that go in those slots though. The war industrialist guy comes to mind.

well if you start a game in 36 and expect war in 39 it is always worth taking the PP guy. by 40 you have 2 extra ministers 41 its 3 extra.

I don't know that the extra 15% is worth it for any countries outside of France/USA TBH. It seems to me that the 150 PP *now* is often more valuable than a slightly faster drip after 1.5 years. If it does become something that everybody always goes for and wants I might lower it's effectiveness to 10%, but I honestly don't think that will be neccessary.

I'm awaiting feedback from our current saturday game, which is the first one to use the lower pp value, but I understand that a lot of vanilla MP players use the "hard" mode specifically because it restricts PP to a more interesting level (the same -.25 applied in PS).

i get where you come from. i wonder how the balance affects between nations with acces to political workhorses and those who dont hav acces to them. they still need 2,7 ish years till one extra mister can get hired. and then every 1.35 years an extra. wich becomes now even stronger in comparison to the normal gain if you have NF running all the time wich is 0.83 years per minister. Which can hinder the axis also a lot mid war. all those damm VPs that cost PP for occupation.

Yes, Political Power does seem to be a bit too easy to come by in MP games. It's easy to boost your ideology in 2 or 3 countries, or constantly be researching a focus because you'll still have enough PP by the time the war starts (unless you are Fracne or USA). I wanted players to have a harder choice. "should I really research a focus now, or save for a new economy law, or try to get turkey to go communist?" This shouldn't be a "i'll just do all three and it will take slightly longer" choice, like it is too often in vanilla.

I didn't nerf it by much though, only down by 1/8th (about 12%) from vanilla. I think that's *just* enough to make these decisions have a little more weight. It felt too easy to finish your entire focus tree *and* get every law/staff position you wanted *and* boost 2-3 countries all at the same time. I expect that this will result in possible delays between choosing a new focus in order to save up more PP, which is part of the goal.

just checked in SP, why did you debuff player PP gain? Did you feel PP was to much around?

Yeach thats it, penalty for having to much width over the limit of a battle. I saw in many games units with width about 30-40 and they were much better than "normal" 20. I say more, 20 width were totaly useless. Is it possible to give bigger penalty for high widith unit?

Just updated to version 0.4 which contains a TON of small fixes and balance tweaks to national focuses as well as a standardization of the diplomacy focuses across the countries. You can find these updates listed in the "change notes" link under the Perfect Storm image on the top right of this page.

A lot of these changes are based on gut feelings, so please leave me any feedback if you find something isn't working out well from a balance perspective, or, of course, if you find any bugs :)

@Polakko What do you mean the penalty for unit width? The penalty for having to much width over the limit of a battle?

Could You do something with penalty for unit widht? Because actually after few games, i see how big unit is, in fact, doesnt matter.

I plan to spend Tuesday night working on it. Hopefully I'll be able to put the next update out later this week, perhaps Saturday. Sorry for the delay, my schedule is very busy and I haven't had a chance to work on it in a week or so.

Is the update coming soon? I've got another MP game starting in like a week.

cool

Next version brings max forts down to 6 and lowers their effectiveness from 13% per level to 12% per level (this brings them slightly less effective than vanilla level 5 forts for a higher cost).