New Modern Units

Have a feature request for SRU? Post here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

dax1
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 511
Joined: Apr 05 2012
Human: Yes
Location: Italy

Re: New Modern Units

Post by dax1 »

Con forza ed ardimento
Kristijonas
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 884
Joined: Nov 11 2011
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Kristijonas »

Are there any thoughts on adding some more futuristic units as well? I think playing as Belarus I've noticed air units in particular didn't feel futuristic at all and there may not even have been late year units at all.
Undecided
Warrant Officer
Posts: 26
Joined: May 22 2015
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Undecided »

dax1 wrote:pile of emojis
Fair enough, I missed a few, but my point is still valid I think.

For example, look at silo-launched nuclear missiles. Of the 38 available models, nearly all of them are available to the US, Russia, India, and China -- except a single missile design that the rest of the world shares among them.

Stealth strategic bombers. There's one class for the EU, two for US, one for Japan, and one for the Warsaw nations. Any for the rest of the planet? Nope.

The examples go on for other major strategic weapons like nuclear carriers. UAVs. And others I've previously mentioned.

Superpowers like Russia and America get iterative upgrades to units every 5 years so so. They also get a far greater diversity of unit specializations (stealthed, fast, long-range, short-range, etc). Much of the non-superpower tech groups only get one or two throughout the entire game, and it's ~100 year span. By only adding existing modern units instead of generic worldwide units, they're kind of screwing players over by giving superpower tech groups more choices, while smaller ones (or the worldwide tech group) are put at an even greater disadvantage due to having comparatively fewer ones
Kristijonas wrote:Are there any thoughts on adding some more futuristic units as well? I think playing as Belarus I've noticed air units in particular didn't feel futuristic at all and there may not even have been late year units at all.
That would be nice, but I think the devs aren't all that interested in far future stuff. In the 5-10 years the game has been around, they still have lots of late-game technologies that have no effect despite their description (like generically engineered soldiers, androids, transferring human consciousness to machine, nanobot plagues, etc). They've neither removed those technologies, nor added units to them.

And the technologies don't appear to stack either. So you invent advanced UAVs, but go back to piloted fighters for the next era's fighters. Or the best aircraft for this era might be anti-gravity platforms, but the next era you your best aircraft goes back to helicopters. It's like units are only capable of using one or two major technologies at a time, all of which are mutually exclusive.
Kristijonas
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 884
Joined: Nov 11 2011
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Kristijonas »

Hope I'm not spoiling anything for BG but I had a premonition that the next SR game will be futuristic scifi-like one :wink: Really looking forward to it. Sounds much more interesting than WW1 to me. As for those unused technologies - I think those would be wonderful to fill in with units! :O Though I would really like more units to have worldwide accessibility. Playing as small countries can sometimes feel like you're really missing out on certain technologies and their uses. For example I remember certain techs introduced several units (they are shown) but none of them were multiple countries or worldwide, meaning the technology will give 0 new units to research for small countries while big countries will have them.
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: New Modern Units

Post by YoMomma »

Kristijonas wrote:Playing as small countries can sometimes feel like you're really missing out on certain technologies and their uses. For example I remember certain techs introduced several units (they are shown) but none of them were multiple countries or worldwide, meaning the technology will give 0 new units to research for small countries while big countries will have them.
I agree this is an issue, even China lacks alot of future units simple cause they dont share data public. All would be solved if you get unit designs of the regions you capture and pls not player only.


About sci fi SRU well looks like theres still alot of unfinished work.
Gameplay 1st
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Nerei »

It is not just sci-fi units that are missing. We could do with some of the concept units that was never realised. As an example the US navy basically runs out of nuclear powered carrier escorts with the 84 Virginias.
No the two fictional battleship designs do not really count as they are not really escorts. Their cost and maintenance should be increased though as it is ridiculously cheap.
There actually was plans for a roughly 15000 tonne nuclear powered cruiser in the late 1970s which if we assume they where build over 10-15 years and with a 20 year mid-life refuel could provide fairly decent nuclear warships up to around 2010.
Adding things like this might go a long way towards padding out some nations. It will not solve everything as say the DPRK does not have that many nuclear powered aircraft carrier concept to add but it would be a start.

Personally for sci-fi I would say start out adding real modern units as we are still missing several things there then concepts and finally fill in with fictional units and start building forwards on what already is there. For nations where their projects are on public record we can probably cover up to around 2030 in some cases with real plans.


For the record for fictional projects we probably need to help BG a bit with names as sometimes they are not the best at getting them right ^_-
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: New Modern Units

Post by YoMomma »

Yes we dont have enough US units yet :D
Gameplay 1st
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Nerei »

Well do any region group have enough units? ^_-
Admitted the US is probably among the best off if not the best but it would still be good to have some of the cancelled projects and concepts considered over the years included.
Right now I find the game is a bit too bad at forcing you down a certain route.
There are so many interesting and sometimes crazy ideas that could be interesting to have included.

Also I noticed the Akizuki has been added as the DD-118 Akizuki.
The correct would be DD-115 Akikuzi or DD-118 Fuyuzuki. Also if you want to add the 4th (and last) ship of a class you probably also want the lead ship.
You can probably rename the DD-117 Takanami to DD-115 Akizuki if you want both (or alternatively remove it). There are only 5 Takanamis the last being DD-114 Suzunami.
BTW the Akizuki has custom graphics (ID 1679) if you want to use it.
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: New Modern Units

Post by YoMomma »

Im not waiting for the 5th OP strategic bomber or anything, im waiting for AI to field a descent army for war. Well not really waiting im doing some modding and basicly if a region buys alot of units from Russia for example i add the design for them in so they can build them.
The problem right now is regions build crap units, sell them because they dont want them and buy units from regions that then also dont have those units left for themselves to fight. Adding in WW1 and WW2 units also doesnt help since they dont do anything besides cost alot, use alot including computer resources to keep track of them.

What you want will only add few hundred US units, maybe some Russian and Japanese or something, but Algeria, Poland, Spain, etc. all still have problems compared to whats actually happening in the world.

Im not saying i dont want to see crazy ideas, but i think its more for future stuff you understand? If those project can be worldwide then we can talk, but another issue is regions which have their own equipment usually dont have access to multiple and worldwide. Infact i have to look up SR2020 because i think somehow it was better there.

Edit: Comparing the files with SR2020 showed me devs made adjustments in the .UNIT file assigning units to the regions. Like sometimes more regions are assigned but with for example light infantry and airborne there are less regions assigned then in SR2020. Such a puzzle.
Gameplay 1st
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Nerei »

Okay wall of text. Sorry about that
Well most of these issues you bring up are generally problems with the AI and not issues with the number of designs available.
I doubt everyone at BG is doing AI programming so it is less likely dedicating resources to one will have a great impact on the other. I agree it is worth complaining if mr. Geczy is putting his focus on this instead of game code but I doubt he is.

Arguing that one should not happen due to problems with the other is like saying while the game engine has memory leaks the art team should not work on game assets but try to fix that. Trust me that is not going to give you useful results. The art team is not going to do well with programming tasks and with something as specialised as AI I doubt most designers can be of much help either. It is squarely on the shoulders of the programmers. At large studios AI programmers is actually a job description in its own right.


That is not to say I do not think these are problems. AI improvements is probably the main thing I want and I would 10 times rather buy an expansion for SRU that offers great updates to AI, diplomacy and unit management than additional starting dates (or unit designs for that matter). I have also for some time been arguing that maybe BG should go open source with the AI to allow people greater options to tweak it to their liking.

So yes I fully agree it is a problem but I do not think BG should drop everything they are doing to fix it as that very likely means throwing people at it that is not going to be able to do anything. People that could instead deliver content improvements such as this.


As for computer resources I doubt additional designs is what is causing slowdowns which by far is the main issue with the game. More likely they take up additional memory which is not really much of an issue all things considered. I have yet to really go over 3GB memory usage and have not heard about or seen anyone having OOM crashes. It certainly also appears the CPU will bottleneck before critical memory issues appear.
I also suspect the greatest memory usage culprit will be the number of units which again would be about teaching the AI to not build 10000 P-36's in 1980.

If you look at SR:GW one of the praises for it is the much improved speed it runs at which is interesting as SR:U and SR:GW shares unit lists. The number of units though is very low compared to say GC2020.
Most likely what is causing the slowdowns is probably the AI activating half its 100.000 unit army and then have them march in circles in northern Mongolia, inner Kongo or they run out of fuel in western China and probably still tax up the AI pathfinding trying to go somewhere at speed 0. Transferring a few thousand units might also be part of it but again that has nothing to do with the unit designs and all to do with the AI basically being an idiot.


Personally I am not massively in favour of worldwide designs or super high tech designs for regions without any expertise in this field.
I find having countries like Southern Sudan setup their own heavy arms industry and within a few years have a full assembly line of world class domestic designed MBTs quite unrealistic. Having them suddenly build carriers that rival some of the better designs built by navies with decades (or a century really) of experience is outright absurd. You are not going to get anything remotely resembling the real world by having Southern Sudan suddenly build their own Gerald R. Ford or Armata copies with less than a decade invested into it.

Ideally they should buy their units either on order (yes I know this is not possible but it would be great if it was) or used or they should buy blueprints especially for older units as I doubt say the US would sell all design plans for the F-22 but that again is largely AI issues not unit designs. Unit sales could also do with some work as having the US sell their Zumwalt or Russia all their Armatas is not exactly realistic either.

Instead of world designs or really high tech designs for say Southern Sudan I would much, much rather they have the ability to access a regions tech group if they conquer them as that could represent assimilation of technical expertise, practical experience and looting existing design blueprints. Basically if Algeria conquers Germany they should/would have access to some German designs as they now have at least part of the staff at say Rheinmetall or KMW.
Without conquering a region group with good designs like say Israel I really do not think countries like Southern Sudan should not have good designs but should instead buy them. The time most games stretches over really does not allow for much building of extensive local expertise where none already exist.
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: New Modern Units

Post by YoMomma »

Uhm South Sudan needs about 50 game years to catch up on techs? :P

Im not talking in game buying units giving the design. For example Algeria is buying hundreds of T90 tanks last years. What i do is add the T90 design for Algeria including techs they need for that :)

For the rest im glad we are back at the post where i proposed unit design capture plus techs and glad you agree. Would you agree as well it will get future equipment as well? I mean look at US after WW2, so many military advances thanks to German scientists.

So not all work has to stop, i never said that. But if they really wanna work on this as a priority, like i said there is lots of stuff that can be done in the CVP and UNIT file as well.

Devs got anything to add about their game?
Gameplay 1st
Nerei
General
Posts: 1354
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Nerei »

I thought you meant they should drop everything to solve these issues. Sorry for misunderstanding you.

50 years might actually not be that much off in some cases. To some extend we can argue that the DPRKs nuclear program started somewhere in the in the 1960's or 70's but it only delivered a weapon in 2006.

Gerald R. Ford is largely the same story. It is build upon the US navys experience with angled flight-deck supercarriers dating back to the Forrestals.
You can naturally import foreign expertise etc. but it can only do so much.
The PRC has the industrial strength to build carriers but critically lack the experience in carrier operations to really make optimal designs.
The PRC aircraft carrier programme also started sometime in the 1970's but have only gotten to the point of launching their first true domestic carrier. In their defence though it should be said that for a long time they only studied foreign designs.
Getting a warship Gerald R. Ford is still unlikely to happen for a long time as the comparable would probably be the Type 003. Even the new Type 002 building right now is some years into the future.

Another example of playing catch-up would be Japan that despite investing heavily in industrialisation only managed to start building domestic battleships around 1905 and that was with foreign aid. It can be argued that it was not before the Nagato laid down in 1917 that there are designs that are not heavily based on British designs (Kongō is a British design and both Fusō and Ise is based on it).


Giving designs might work for some time and in some cases are not a far stretch but in the long run there needs to be some way for say african countries to acquire unit designs and my personal opinion is that it would be great if they where capable of properly buying say the T-90 design and nations like Russia was capable of properly selling equipment so they do not always sell all their Armatas leaving them with nothing good themselves.

As for region group designs I would simply give Southern Sudan the "I" flag if it conquered Israel and let it research anything Israel could. No new techs actually given to them just the ability to research them. You might have gained access to IAI and Mantak and their personnel but most likely they burned all archives, smashed their HDD's etc.
It might lead to a lot of unit designs but the player can hide some if needed and the AI probably does not care about it.
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2544
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: New Modern Units

Post by SGTscuba »

Nerei wrote:I thought you meant they should drop everything to solve these issues. Sorry for misunderstanding you.

50 years might actually not be that much off in some cases. To some extend we can argue that the DPRKs nuclear program started somewhere in the in the 1960's or 70's but it only delivered a weapon in 2006.

Gerald R. Ford is largely the same story. It is build upon the US navys experience with angled flight-deck supercarriers dating back to the Forrestals.
You can naturally import foreign expertise etc. but it can only do so much.
The PRC has the industrial strength to build carriers but critically lack the experience in carrier operations to really make optimal designs.
The PRC aircraft carrier programme also started sometime in the 1970's but have only gotten to the point of launching their first true domestic carrier. In their defence though it should be said that for a long time they only studied foreign designs.
Getting a warship Gerald R. Ford is still unlikely to happen for a long time as the comparable would probably be the Type 003. Even the new Type 002 building right now is some years into the future.

Another example of playing catch-up would be Japan that despite investing heavily in industrialisation only managed to start building domestic battleships around 1905 and that was with foreign aid. It can be argued that it was not before the Nagato laid down in 1917 that there are designs that are not heavily based on British designs (Kongō is a British design and both Fusō and Ise is based on it).


Giving designs might work for some time and in some cases are not a far stretch but in the long run there needs to be some way for say african countries to acquire unit designs and my personal opinion is that it would be great if they where capable of properly buying say the T-90 design and nations like Russia was capable of properly selling equipment so they do not always sell all their Armatas leaving them with nothing good themselves.

As for region group designs I would simply give Southern Sudan the "I" flag if it conquered Israel and let it research anything Israel could. No new techs actually given to them just the ability to research them. You might have gained access to IAI and Mantak and their personnel but most likely they burned all archives, smashed their HDD's etc.
It might lead to a lot of unit designs but the player can hide some if needed and the AI probably does not care about it.
^this would do me nicely. I think I may have to did the SUT thread out to see if the Goats will revisit it.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2544
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: New Modern Units

Post by SGTscuba »

Various versions of the British "River" class, this base ship has been modified into various differing variants from fisheries patrol up to light frigate.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
Vasquez
Corporal
Posts: 4
Joined: Apr 23 2017
Human: Yes

Re: New Modern Units

Post by Vasquez »

Besides the current Leopard 2A7 I would also add the 2A6m (70 has eben built in 2005 to 2006) and the latest version the 2A7V. To be introduced in 2018/2019. All info avaiable in wikipedia.
Post Reply

Return to “Suggestions - SRU”