Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Have a feature request for SRU? Post here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

arakan94 wrote:
Dec 12 2019
It's not my native language either. I would expect someone with higher education to know it well though. Or at least use the "Check spelling" feature in your web browser - you can set it to English and it would fix most of your errors as they are often just letters in wrong order.

Syria received Mig-25s from USSR. They didn't build a single one of them.
I am not sure what F-18 do you mean. Hornet? Neither Germany nor Greece are even using those.

Cooperation doesn't mean that country is able to make that plane. Take F-35, for example - it uses components from many countries but only USA (or rather US company - Lockheed Martin) is able to build them.

My suggestion would be to add fantasy units to these regions in case some country becomes large enough to develop their own modern weaponry.
f 18 hornet, mig 25. I mentioned them as being in the technological tree of the Siria,Greece and Germany. USA coperate vith Japanes on FA 2. Romanija and Yugoslavija coperate on J 22-orao. So if we're at realism,cooperation while happen in future.
Have you ever seen an in-game AI buy some design to produce from another AI?
arakan94
Lieutenant
Posts: 56
Joined: Oct 10 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by arakan94 »

milivoje02 wrote:
Dec 12 2019

f 18 hornet, mig 25. I mentioned them as being in the technological tree of the Siria,Greece and Germany.
They shouldn't be there.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

Zuikaku wrote:
Dec 12 2019
You are quite serious in comparing japanese aeronautical (and space) industry with region's X tampering with (now) 50 years old T-72 design? You are seriously comparing japanese research capacity with that of all region X countries combined?
And I am biased here?

Also I gave you reasoning why I'm against giving certain designs to certain regions. You did not give me any counterargument on these except repeating over and over again that I am biased and against X region countries and that X region is advanced beyond all beliefs in arms industry. What are you then? Having grudge against Z and V group countries for not wanting exactly the same criteria for them?

and concerning region X MiG-29s:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... 29s-serbia
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... -grow.html
http://en.interaffairs.ru/analytics/107 ... ation.html

at the time of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War in 1999, it had only 13 MiG-29B fighters and two MiG-29UB operational trainers acquired in the late 1980s. All were in service with Squadron127 of Fighter Regiment 204 at Batajnica. Six of these aircraft were shot down and five more were withdrawn due to various causes.

So, there were 13 + 2 trainers. 11 were lost and 4 remained. Of these 4 none was airworthy 3 years ago (due to lack of batteries and spares). 6 were donated to Serbia by Russia. That is 4 + 6 = 10. So your number (20) is mistery to me. The same funny thing is with Croatian MiG-21s and their innability to have 6 of them serviceable.

But I'm biased for not wanting region X (and other regions to be clear), being able to research and produce these aircrafts. We are talking about region not being able to keep serviceable a handfull of MiG-29s (or worse MiG-21s).
I compared the collaboration model. The way it come to devolop of FA2 plane,tank M 84 is simular. Both are based on other model. FA 2 on F 16 and M 84 tank on T 72 tank.you Can predict future co-ops?
if you can predict the future say who will win the Champions League this year? To place money on it :o :-) ???
Serbia curent have a 14 to 16 (2 treaning no fit to fight) mig 29. I think it could bee better for that money.
The source of you is strange. because Moma Stanojlovic is in Rakovica not in Batajnica. Ear base in Batajnica.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by Balthagor »

FYI, I am following this thread still.

I agree with Zuikaiku for much of this. I'll admit that I allowed a lot of these because X used to be part of T, so why not give them something that T can access? Zuikaiku's argument has me wondering if I was too generous.

@milivoje02 - I'm not sure yet what we will finally decide for some of these units, but you might want to learn just a bit of modding so you can play "your version" of what's available to research. This update gave you lots of things you asked for, but decisions on balancing could change this back.

For now, the changes I listed are in. We'll see if I regret my decisions...

Also, let's try to not be too harsh on our non-English speakers. Glad that the suggestion of spell check was offered but we'll get some less computer savvy users sometimes.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Nerei
General
Posts: 1126
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by Nerei »

Region group X is one of the more deficient groups post 2020 and I can see the argument for increasing the number of unit designs it has access to. Being a fictive future BG can technically decide whatever it should roughly be but there should still be some logic to it.

The main issue I see is that in some cases the choices seems quite odd. For this adjustment you are at times dragging out 1960's technology and to the best I can determine intend to use it to bolster group X post 2020. The Project 61M mod. Kashin and Project 1134A Kresta II are good examples.

Ignoring that these are obviously Cold War era Soviet designs they are plain and simple just obsolete. No sane nation would build them today none have been in service for nearly two decades or more. Even the more modern Indian Kashins are being retired.

This solution only works as their stats are fairly extreme. Yes I checked they are broken compared to similarly armed vessels.
If they where actually brought in-line with what you see on other vessels with similar equipment they would not really be very useful in 2020.
This solution is just not future-proof.

Really if the goal is to have designs for group X in the future would it then not be better to invent something rather than take Soviet vessels from the 1960's with broken stats?
For a start it will give Group X content that is not obviously Soviet and it will give it content that is not at risk of being somewhat pointless after a future stat adjustment.

If nothing else use them as a template for fictive post 2020 designs that group X can research. That will also allow you to compensate for deficiencies like the short air attack range the Mod. Kashin Kresta II have compared to 21st century vessels.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

If you break spears,don't break only on X group.The group E,Q,T,G,F,K,Z,D ... Everyone has shared units. So why not X group be treated the same? Let all the group be interesting for the play from the view of which country we choose to play with. In the previous year, the X group was mutilated. So I hope that in this one she will be equipped with sheard and ficitve unit as are others groups. The current changes make it decent to play with.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

Yugoslavija was country of south slavs and you form a X group for it? Yugoslavia means in translation country of south slavs. Why don't you put all south slavs country in it? Bring Bulgarija in X group.
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2282
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by Zuikaku »

milivoje02 wrote:
Dec 12 2019
If you break spears,don't break only on X group.The group E,Q,T,G,F,K,Z,D ... Everyone has shared units. So why not X group be treated the same? Let all the group be interesting for the play from the view of which country we choose to play with. In the previous year, the X group was mutilated. So I hope that in this one she will be equipped with sheard and ficitve unit as are others groups. The current changes make it decent to play with.
The main question is which way BGs intended/intend to develop this game. Is it a strategy as realistic as it can be? Or is it some sort of fantasy strategy loosely based on real world. I had impression that they want the former. If that is the case, you can not have region groups filled with other region's units just for the sake of balance, patriotism or subjective feeling that your favourite group is mutilated. If someone chooses to play Micronesia or Iceland hr can not expect to have same choices, options or possibilitie as with Chinese or German gameplay. At least if we are talking about strategy game with some references to the real world. And that is the beauty of strategy games - not having the same possibilities with every region you pick.

And playing small (or as you say "mutilated") regions in SRU is far too easy. AAR section is full of threads like "Icelandic conquest of the world".
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

Zuikaku wrote:
Dec 13 2019
milivoje02 wrote:
Dec 12 2019
If you break spears,don't break only on X group.The group E,Q,T,G,F,K,Z,D ... Everyone has shared units. So why not X group be treated the same? Let all the group be interesting for the play from the view of which country we choose to play with. In the previous year, the X group was mutilated. So I hope that in this one she will be equipped with sheard and ficitve unit as are others groups. The current changes make it decent to play with.
The main question is which way BGs intended/intend to develop this game. Is it a strategy as realistic as it can be? Or is it some sort of fantasy strategy loosely based on real world. I had impression that they want the former. If that is the case, you can not have region groups filled with other region's units just for the sake of balance, patriotism or subjective feeling that your favourite group is mutilated. If someone chooses to play Micronesia or Iceland hr can not expect to have same choices, options or possibilitie as with Chinese or German gameplay. At least if we are talking about strategy game with some references to the real world. And that is the beauty of strategy games - not having the same possibilities with every region you pick.

And playing small (or as you say "mutilated") regions in SRU is far too easy. AAR section is full of threads like "Icelandic conquest of the world".
What do you suggest for f 18 in Region group of Germany,Greece? And what you suggest for mig 25 and 29 in region group of Siria,Egipt? If you are objective, deal with them too.
What is the condition for winning the game? again this is just a game.
Treat all regions the same. Sheard units are in all regions.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

I bought the original steam game. i didn't buy anyone's mod or take it for free. let them do whatever they want in them. In the official game the goal is to conquer the world.
So whatever country I take it will heppend population,resors and teritory expansion. Which means more money for investing in weapons. Because how else to conquer the world in the game and get steam badges?
If you break spears,don't break only on X group.The group E,Q,T,G,F,K,Z,D ... Everyone has shared units. So why not X group be treated the same? Let all the group be interesting for the play from the view of which country we choose to play with.
Full support and trust for the BG team.
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20519
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by Balthagor »

Our original design would lean more towards removing multiple regions from existing units (X, Z, Q, etc) with some focus on who is "likely" to build units of a certain type.

We've seen players conquer the world from Fiji, so a "lack of unit designs to research" is not a barrier to winning the game. You can always trade for designs.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2282
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by Zuikaku »

X group is not treated the same lately since it got a load of equipment it does not belong to it.

And I have written a few times what to do with equipment generously given to the "wrong" regional groups, but seems this all fall on deaf ears.
All you do is complaining how X region is ill treated (is it?) completely ignoring everything else and any argument that does not fit your narrative.
You are not really interested in improving the game but making region you prefer to play with unrealistically powerfull. You can easily buy licences or units from almost everyone in the game. Why these equipment have to be researchable for region X is just beyond my brain capacity! And you can also edit unit database to make every prefered peace of equipment researchable by X region group. Personally I do not want to play the "strategy" game where regions can research things that are not their indegnious designs.

There shoul'd be world designs (like Regal tank) but do not make specific national units world units!

What makes a good strategy is that every minor country can steamroll the rest of the world in a few years (game) time to easily get steam badges? No, it isn't!
Should the grand-scale geopolitical simulators be balanced? No, at least if they want to be somewhat realistic. Every country have different population, resource, economy and research base and capacity.
As I have stated before, you can not pick some small, poor with resources, low research base and population of few millions country and expect to have easy gameplay (and being able to stand against superpowers on own). I'm really baffled by some players who expect the same gameplay experience while playing USA, China, Brazil, Madagascar, Iraq or Fiji.

Given the reasons above, I don't see the point in further discussion here. No hard feelings! :wink:
Please teach AI to liberate and colonize instead of only annexing!
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

AI do not trade for desinge with ohter AI. I played for 4000 hours and I have never seen a AI to buy a design from other AI. There are also groups T,D,G,F wich have sharde units.
Inser Bulgaria in X group,they are also south slavs.
How realistic is it for AI to sell the design to human pleyer if we go to attack him ?
Whatever you do make it objective for the game with no handicapped regions even with imaginary units.
In reality, the world is not going to shape much because of nuclear weapons. In this game every country will try to conquer it even though there is riality a USA and Russia have a nuclear arsenal to wipe out everyone who challenges them. And technological development will continue in reality in the direction of the challenges and the market. Again, anyone can choose a country they like and they does not need to feel like a cavemans when they enters in tex tree of that country.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

Zuikaku wrote:
Dec 13 2019
X group is not treated the same lately since it got a load of equipment it does not belong to it.

And I have written a few times what to do with equipment generously given to the "wrong" regional groups, but seems this all fall on deaf ears.
All you do is complaining how X region is ill treated (is it?) completely ignoring everything else and any argument that does not fit your narrative.
You are not really interested in improving the game but making region you prefer to play with unrealistically powerfull. You can easily buy licences or units from almost everyone in the game. Why these equipment have to be researchable for region X is just beyond my brain capacity! And you can also edit unit database to make every prefered peace of equipment researchable by X region group. Personally I do not want to play the "strategy" game where regions can research things that are not their indegnious designs.

There shoul'd be world designs (like Regal tank) but do not make specific national units world units!

What makes a good strategy is that every minor country can steamroll the rest of the world in a few years (game) time to easily get steam badges? No, it isn't!
Should the grand-scale geopolitical simulators be balanced? No, at least if they want to be somewhat realistic. Every country have different population, resource, economy and research base and capacity.
As I have stated before, you can not pick some small, poor with resources, low research base and population of few millions country and expect to have easy gameplay (and being able to stand against superpowers on own). I'm really baffled by some players who expect the same gameplay experience while playing USA, China, Brazil, Madagascar, Iraq or Fiji.

Given the reasons above, I don't see the point in further discussion here. No hard feelings! :wink:
What do you suggest for f 18 in Region group of Germany,Greece? And what you suggest for mig 25 and 29 in region group of Siria,Egipt?
No hard feelings!
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 288
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes

Re: Serb unit addition request (Split from Changelog 9.1.114)

Post by milivoje02 »

Zuikaku if you expand with Malta on all Europe and Russia(of corse if form some reason Russia did not nuke the hell in you) shoud you stil devolop units like you have 400 000 people reasorses or like you have 600 000 000 people rasorses to spend on future devolopment of units?
Post Reply

Return to “Suggestions - SRU”