Unit Errata

[flashy]

Transport Ships
AOR-512 Souteneur JSS -> As USA you start with 12 of those in the reserves, they are Commonwealth ships that require 21st Centurry Naval Vessels technology

they are the hypothetical representation of the new class of Canadian joint supply ships, for which the contract has just been recently awarded. i find the name curious because it has never appeared in any source i could find

[number47]

a lot of ingame tanks (M47 Patton, M46A1 Pershing, M26 Pershing, M103 Conqueror & Conqueror II, J-61, Shir-1 Khalid...etc.) use model from real life AMX-13 FL 10 (which is wrong but not the issue I want to point out) and the ingame AMX-13 FL 10 doesn't?

The "AMX-13" and "AMX-13 FL-10 HOT ATGM" versions use correct model...

[BlackEagle]

little-minor-stupid issues on russian air force units:

maybe the russian PAK-FA pic should be similar to that of F-35 Lightining 2 no?

and:

SU-47 Bekrut bomber has small (don't know how'd you say that in english) "negative delta wing", so pic should be more similar to that currently used for Mig 1.44

again:

Mig 37 Nato codename is not Flywheel but FERRET ... it's currently using the F15 Eagle pic but looks more like a Raptor

i guess that the ipotethical MIG 41, Nato codename FOXGLOVE is a Stealth variant of Mig 37 designed for air superiority, which can be deployed on a long deck carrier. Doesn't look like a Foxbat, should be very similar to the Raptor .. or it could be also replaced by the Ruski stealth aircraft pic


aaaand:

does Su55 exists? Is a ipothetical PAK FA version? Anyway, pic should be replaced with that of Raptor... in any case it should never look like a variable wing Fencer =P

Mig-37 and Mig-41 are not real fighters, so they don't have official NATO codename... Just fictional codenames.

[number47]

There is an issue in tank design development.

The design upgrade line in question is following:
T-72M -> T-72M1 -> M-84 -> M84A4 Sniper -> M-95 Degman (-> = upgrades to)
The regions being able to build the designs are as following:
T-72M = RL
T-72M1 = RQT
M-84 = T
M84A4 = T
M-95 = T

Do you see the problem? Regions Q and T will never be able to build their designs because they miss the first design in the line

Also one question...is it possible to make two upgrades of the same unit?
for example T-72M1-> M-84 & T-72M1-> PT-91 Twardy M 2001 (M84B) = because in real life the M-84 and PT-91 were two separate advancements of the T-72 (one Yugoslav and one Polish). The reason I ask is because PT-91 becomes available far too early for research as it has no prerequisite unit

[number47]

One more thing,

why M84B and M 2001 in PT-91 Twardy M 2001 (M84B)

It look as there are three versions stuffed in one
It should be just PT-91 Twardy because:
1. M2001 was Serbian upgrade of M-84AB (M2001 is commonly known as M-84AS)
2. I dont know what M84B should represent as in M-84 family there is no model with just letter B but there was M-84AB though.

The reason for the mix-up could be the development of M-84 after the breakdown of Yugoslavia. Here is the development of M-84 during and after the breakdown:

Yugoslavia
(M-84 -> M-84A ->M-84AB)

Croatia
(M-84AB -> M-84A4 -> M-84D)

Serbia
(M-84AB -> M-84AS which is also known as M-2001)

Also the Yugoslavia was developing new tank not based on T-72. The tank had project name M-91 Vihor. The war broke up before it was finished and the designs were left in Croatia which used them as a base for M-95 Degman.

Therefore I suggest making M-95 Degman a separate design, not upgrade of T-72. And it should have at least the following prerequisite thecnologies so it wouldnt become available for research too early: composite armour, reactive armour, improved fire control (fell free to add more )

[Balthagor]

no, can't upgrade to two things in the current engine. If those regions managed to trade for the prereq design they would then be able to research it but I'll change that. Carry over from SR2020 where upgrade too simply hide previous designs, wasn't actually a prereq.

Looking at the rest may wait some time, focused on units in the Cold War era first.

[number47]

no, can't upgrade to two things in the current engine.

Yeah, I feared so...too bad the sistem works "this unit upgrades to that unit" instead of "this unit needs that unit as prerequisite"

Looking at the rest may wait some time, focused on units in the Cold War era first.

Does this mean there is possibility you will add more accurate models for Cold war units?

[Balthagor]

Like I always say, anything is possible.

You could start a new thread about units who's meshes ppl suggest we change, either to a different existing one or that ppl say is significant enough that it should get it's own model added...

[number47]

Like I always say, anything is possible.

You could start a new thread about units who's meshes ppl suggest we change, either to a different existing one or that ppl say is significant enough that it should get it's own model added...

Thanks, I'll give it a try

[flashy]

S2F-3S (S-2E) Tracker : the wings may fold up on them but the engines don't! shouldn't be VTOL. wishful thinking but you should add a CP-121 variant

J-7 Shenyang: should be reversed, eventually became Chengdu J-7 once production shifted

DEG-1 Brooke: i know it was a one-off designed for AAW but the ranges seem a bit high

[Fistalis]

DEG-1 Brooke: i know it was a one-off designed for AAW but the ranges seem a bit high

Its extended ranges is probably counting the fact it carried a SH-2_Seasprite

[flashy]

DEG-1 Brooke: i know it was a one-off designed for AAW but the ranges seem a bit high

Its extended ranges is probably counting the fact it carried a SH-2_Seasprite

makes sense, same principle applies to the Chinese Luda II DDH

[Jakt80]

The swedish tanks are supposed to be "Stridsvagn" not "Stridsvagan" or Stridsvagen" nor "Stridswagen" or other some such.

For example the Strv-103 Stridsvagan is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

Just pointing out =)

[icbm78]

France and Germany are capable of producing WWII weapons (Tiger, for instance) - why? That's not realistic. They should build Chaffee tanks, Shermans, etc.

And there is a mistake in Chaffee specs: it's protected better than Pershing).

[flashy]

yes but they had no indigenous capability to produce those units and could only beg, borrow or steal them off the yanks