T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

General discussion related to the game goes here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

When the T group was established Serbia and Croatia were in its founding,were involved in the initial selection of units It's really bad to throw them out and leave it without 80 % units that were in tex tre.
If we talk about the reality of the game,there are not many countries that have developed domestic units in history,Serbia and Croatia have developed 3 models of domestic tanks ich (m 84 and upgrades) (My links in my previous post).and They are not assumed to have a future M84 version in 10 years? The rest of the countries are mainly buying designs from Germany,USA,Russia,Frace,UK...So although they do not have their own history of desinges , they still get futuristic tanks Rocket artillery,among the first in Europe(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-87_Orkan) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-87_Orka ... n_II_1.jpg) and the newest rocket weapons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumadija_ ... _launcher)).
Reality? Kingdom of Serbia was founder of Kingdom of Yugoslavia,and she in scenario 1914 is left as a desert island with units.
Rality ? Yugoslavia she designed on she own 6th fighter bomber,and in the future, there is not even one to dovolop.
Navy? She independently developed her own submarines and destroers,and in future the is none.
Futuristic units should have only USA and Russia?
Realism? Here is the European Union? In sunday(the day of truce in the First World War on November 11th ) mmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron(France presidendt) announced the tendency to form the European army outside of NATO.The starting point is that all Europeans in the seventh receive some community units. Until 2025 that candidate countries will also enter the European Union( not talkin about Turky).

In comparison with the T group,X group is a big hool. And if you're half a group T to transver to X then transfer half of the units of T into X.
capital ship: Compared to the previous state one there is nothing. And in comparison with the surrounding groups even worse.
AA wepons: means in 2040 should rely on SA-2 from 50th?
There's no helicopter at all. and according to the French license from 80 th, Serbia had domesticly product 60 gazzela (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%C3%A9rospatiale_Gazelle) and in the game she have technology from 1936 for chillopters.
if from 2020 is the future? And as the years go ahead(2021,2022,2023,2045...) why it is assumed that the countries will not continue to develop an existing weapon and especially to fill the holes in the arms desinge.
Egypt, Iran, they can develop 10246, "MiG-25RB Foxbat-B and 9209, "MiG-29A Fulcrum-A,Turkish,Greece can develop F18. These are not theirs design,They were given to look better. Why are you make from Serbia And Croatia and rest of Yugoslavia former countries even worse than the are? Serbia And Croatia they were much better at Supreme Ruler 2020 Gold, from Ultimate they are getting worse and worse when the units are subtract.and the players from these countries do not love.and other European countries received more attention. Why are Serbia And Croatia deprived with unist from Supreme Ruler 2020 Gold? should not it all be prosperous?
If we keep historical facts why suppose it will desert in teh tree of Serbia and Coratia ? Croatia is in the EU,Serbia will be in the next few years,and political and bu soil ties with the EU.

it is very bad looking, and I will not comment on groups that have nothing to do with the environment of eastern Europe, because it poorly knows the military order of Asia.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

Nerei wrote: Nov 13 2018 All the units I highlighted are from BG's fictive future and what I am highlighting is that there is some basic holes and bad designs in BG's depiction of that future.

Serbia needs tank in 2035? Sure why not it if effort is made to actually make it a realistic functional unit.
Giving India F-22A raptors to give it better air defences in the 1990's by finding an extremely vague reason or giving say Denmark the design for an aircraft that it currently not producing and is never going to produce locally due to it buying a few of these aircraft that are almost entirely produced and entirely assembled in another country is something else entirely.

Basically I accept the former but reject the latter of the examples above and I am fairly certain that is also what Zuikaku was saying.
Yes that means I do not object to adding fictive equipment to region group X. I have actually said that several times if you bothered to read what I typed. I am arguing against throwing a whole lot of existing gear into region groups based on extremely tenuous arguments "because balance" which is basically your school of design.


Edit: Also no 6 does not become 60 when compiled. It does not become 0.6 either. Why would it?! You might as well have a fighter jet with combat time 4 become 40 or 0.4?
I can also tell you that DD-87 Arkhangel has a listed combat time of 6 in-game. The values are carried over.

Further I can tell you that I am using the asset manager to look up values so no I am not accidentally looking at the wrong number. It is clearly telling me what the values are and when I check them in-game they match.
I read very carefully,With a lot of attention,but I'm afraid that my posts do not read well(I have to admit that I can learn English better ). I agree,but not with the incentive to deprive units of regions without compensation. If I take it we assume the future whether the criterion will be historical development or filling what is not there(if the country does not have AA weapons maybe develop domestic in the next 20 years 2030). these moves with T-group leaving 5 countries will be wiped out. so then half of the equipment from the T Group goes with them or whole.
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by YoMomma »

Nerei wrote: Nov 13 2018 ...that means I do not object to adding fictive equipment to region group X. I have actually said that several times if you bothered to read what I typed. I am arguing against throwing a whole lot of existing gear into region groups based on extremely tenuous arguments "because balance" which is basically your school of design.
Right making Poland stronger with 1 or 2 designs, to reflect massive investments in recent years is a whole lot?

Basicly everyone is for trading unit designs, but what you get will be a bigger mess then what i am doing. Basicly whole world will be producing timberwolfs IV.
Gameplay 1st
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by Zuikaku »

milivoje02 wrote: Nov 13 2018 If this is done and T group is removing from Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo + Slovenia,we'll get a huge emptiness in research invetory. Think about it if possible once again because of a player from the countries listed here. X group is very poor. X group is have no capital ship (in T group trhe is a Kresta 2 anda Grac) in eskort ship noting modern (T group was have option to research Warsava ),no Fighter planes( in T group mig 23) in Ear difence T group took 20 years to get to Sa 12 F Giant-g and X group is have none(There are nothing in the era of laser weapons ),There is no helicopter in X group ( u T goup tehere was a Mi 2 and Vampire),no recon units. No advanced rocket artillery in X group. I'm calling the devolopers take again for consideration seizure of the T group to these countries because if these countries have only units of the X group they will simply be very bad for the game. This is where the merged T and X group works well. X group alone for 2020 + scenarios have no units,let's at least insert units for these holes I mentioned. It was better to play when Serbia and Croatia were in the T group,honestly to tell you with these holes in X group and with knowledge that you plan to take away the T group,I really lose my wish to play . And the other players from the these countries will also feel the same. I expected improvement not the seizure of units.
I hope that they will take you back into consideration because this really looks bad and and it will not be interesting anymore for players from the countries where they were relocated.
I really don't quite understand what is the problem here? X group has exactly the weapons it actually produces. Which helicopters (except Gazelles a long time ago) , recons, capital ships or advanced artillery it produces? Which capital ships it ever produced? The X group have "Novi avion" which was never produced and never got past the drawing board. It also have Vulcan which never entered service. Shoul'd I continue with other designs that were never produced or were prototypes only but are in unit database anyway??

Players can buy any designs they want from allies, so they are not limited in any way.
Please teach AI everything!
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by YoMomma »

Zuikaku wrote: Nov 13 2018 ... Shoul'd I continue with other designs that were never produced or were prototypes only but are in unit database anyway??
Sure, lets start with US for a change, what about aardvark.... no.. cant touch US.
Gameplay 1st
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by Zuikaku »

YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018
Zuikaku wrote: Nov 13 2018 ... Shoul'd I continue with other designs that were never produced or were prototypes only but are in unit database anyway??
Sure, lets start with US for a change, what about aardvark.... no.. cant touch US.
You can touch it. But I was talking about X region since this thread is all about X region. And I'm just pointing out that X region has a fair share of questionable designs (some of which woul'd never be there if harsh criteria were applied). And some of these were added on my intervention. But there shoul'd be some limit. You just can not make some regions enough competitive with designs, at least if you want to preserve some realism. And X region is dangerously close to that limit.
Please teach AI everything!
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by YoMomma »

Ok i can understand what you mean. But if Serbia reunites Yugoslavia, it still would never produce ships? What about if it conquer the world, it would still not be able to come up with competetive designs?

I can understand you, because if you make everyone competetive, they will have a massive army in cloose area which can take out Russia pretty easy unit for unit, if they are spread out. Russia has the T14 to solve that problem, but yeah thats not really good argument.

What about if you take over countries you get their region group, will you still be against that? For example US got tons of discoveries and unit designs thanks to scientist of countries it did take over. Same with Russia.

When 36 was released there were alot of reports of unrealistic gameplay, like China with motorised units and Japan having to cross the ocean led to China 99/100 times winning. Devs said themselves they want open history not realistic. So if China win or Germany wins, that's fine, but ofcourse Japan should conquer south west Asia most times and US alliance with Russia should win most times. Then what's your problem?
Gameplay 1st
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by Zuikaku »

YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018 Ok i can understand what you mean. But if Serbia reunites Yugoslavia, it still would never produce ships?
How can it reunite in the game?
YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018 What about if it conquer the world, it would still not be able to come up with competetive designs?
One of the main flaws of this game is that it is already far to easy to conquer the world with small regions like Serbia, Iceland or Norway. So, let's further "balance" the things in their favour...
YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018
I can understand you, because if you make everyone competetive, they will have a massive army in cloose area which can take out Russia pretty easy unit for unit, if they are spread out. Russia has the T14 to solve that problem, but yeah thats not really good argument.
If you make everybody competitive and there is no difference between USA, Russia and region X in terms of unit variety and competitiveness, than you do have a very unrealistic situation. Ofcourse, if you want realistic game at all. Maybe somebody wants Lebanon to be competitive with the USA/China/Russia. It's up to the personal preferences of each player.

YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018
What about if you take over countries you get their region group, will you still be against that? For example US got tons of discoveries and unit designs thanks to scientist of countries it did take over. Same with Russia.
Actually it is a very good idea. But only to some designs (randomised), since some have to be considered lost.

YoMomma wrote: Nov 13 2018
When 36 was released there were alot of reports of unrealistic gameplay, like China with motorised units and Japan having to cross the ocean led to China 99/100 times winning. Devs said themselves they want open history not realistic. So if China win or Germany wins, that's fine, but ofcourse Japan should conquer south west Asia most times and US alliance with Russia should win most times. Then what's your problem?
Open history (where Japan can win the USA or China can win Japan) is one thing and excessive "balancing" and giving the same staritng points to every region is something very different. IMHO, playing China in '36 shoul'd feel very different than playing Japan. Also, Mexican gameplay shoul'd be uncomparable to playing USA. By this we have 150 flavours of Supreme Ruler. If you "balance" the regions with units, you basically have one flavour for military warplay in Supreme Ruler, since every region is rougly the same.

And if you choose to play as Mexico, how can you expect to have the same freedom of military development as USA? This is something I can not understand.
Please teach AI everything!
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

There is no place here for hate towards any country. Some countries buy design through history and do not develop their own weapons.And that's right, they have the option to devolope futuristic weapons. And some countries have a history that the are develop domestic weapons,and they were denied that they had a futuristic although they are through history they were turned to develop domestic weapons he was deprived of his right to have futuristic weapons. and that's unjust

When the country conquers the entire continent she would probably have resources for advanced weapons. Essentially There should be weapons in all fields and that they differ in strength and quality between the regions.

The only project that has not been completed is a NEW PLANE-NOVI AVION, but a lot of money is wasted in making a tunnel for testing super sonic design,transonic chamber(https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0 ... l_T-38.JPG). But there's a whole family of bombers which has been developed.

And a gazelle is bought from the French(the same as Netherlands bought F 16 from USA) and Serbia It produced 60 pieces who are the aircraft of her aviation, and even more so in the surrounding countries.(https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/SA_342_% ... 0%BB%D0%B0)

When it's first played it is Interesting to buy design. when you becomes a more experienced player It bored to buy desinge because it's too easy to get to the strongest weapon. Then he switches to playing with domestic weapons because it's so hard and very interesting because you do not have the best and and again you have one medium quality. That's why I support so much the development of domestic units. because buying it time gets bored,so it's a good option to with development you can get to average weapon. Buying a design looks like cheating and it is to easy.

I have written some things about realism and I think those who mention it they need to read my post from just before.

It is not realistic that countries can only devolop what they have produced,because what they have does not need to be research. But explore what they do not have and they improve what they have.


The best solution is joining X and T group,and adding and adding some average AA midle range unit. X is the group itself too far behind to be in order to be able to perform in the 2020 scenario(In the previous post I mentioned why). And let's take this into account Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo + Slovenia they were here when the T group was founded so they contributed to its strength and units,so it would be fair for them to stay or to take a half units because they make a half of the group.

It's easiest to play with a USA and Russia.should be given a chance to those who play with smaller countries and they do not like cheating.
YoMomma
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 768
Joined: Jun 27 2015
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by YoMomma »

Zuikaku wrote: Nov 13 2018 And if you choose to play as Mexico, how can you expect to have the same freedom of military development as USA? This is something I can not understand.
Because Russia will mass invest in Mexico to use it as possible ways to conquer US? Ever heard of USSR investments in Cuba? How Cuban military became so big it did military operations in Africa?

If you want to play with old weapons or have no unit designs there are tons of options. From Butan, to Paraquay to Madadgascar to Andorra. Just keeping everyone who imports or upgrades or working together with other countries the same, ignoring military investments or any other argument, just people cant expect to have same military freedom as US, is weak AF. First of all how is Leopard 2A5 competetive to T14? Let alone to whole Russian or US designs capacity? Countries getting that design in .CVP, dont even have the follow ups. It just prevents WW2 military being build as there are more options to buy the tank, which Germany doesnt even produce anymore. Yeah yeah... i know what im gonna get, but does US build unlimited ammount of strategic bombers irl?

Anyway im done with this discussion, i said what i got to say, with as less repetetive things as possible.
Gameplay 1st
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

YoMomma wrote: Nov 14 2018
Zuikaku wrote: Nov 13 2018 And if you choose to play as Mexico, how can you expect to have the same freedom of military development as USA? This is something I can not understand.
Because Russia will mass invest in Mexico to use it as possible ways to conquer US? Ever heard of USSR investments in Cuba? How Cuban military became so big it did military operations in Africa?

If you want to play with old weapons or have no unit designs there are tons of options. From Butan, to Paraquay to Madadgascar to Andorra. Just keeping everyone who imports or upgrades or working together with other countries the same, ignoring military investments or any other argument, just people cant expect to have same military freedom as US, is weak AF. First of all how is Leopard 2A5 competetive to T14? Let alone to whole Russian or US designs capacity? Countries getting that design in .CVP, dont even have the follow ups. It just prevents WW2 military being build as there are more options to buy the tank, which Germany doesnt even produce anymore. Yeah yeah... i know what im gonna get, but does US build unlimited ammount of strategic bombers irl?

Anyway im done with this discussion, i said what i got to say, with as less repetetive things as possible.
It's simply not realistic that we expect only Russia and USA have the option to develop domestic futuristic weapons. in history it was not so,and in the future, you should expect the same.Especially because we do not know what while be in 2030,so it's logical and every country should have options for developing weapons. Especially countries with a tradition of domestic wepons development, Serbia is among them :)
Otherwise, it means that all countries except Russia and USA are standing in one place and are too easy to beat them. not realistic
Typhoon_SSN
Corporal
Posts: 7
Joined: Nov 10 2018
Human: Yes

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by Typhoon_SSN »

It's true that there are a lot of incoherences in the tech trees, the Serbian one being one of the ones that bothered me the most as I love playing Central European countries in every game that allows me to do so. But now, unless you mod it, there's no changing it; we just have to do the job ourselves and later on hope that the next game will include a dedicated, more accurate tech tree!
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

I hope that next weapon which are implemented in the following links be added to the inventory of Serbian army and technological tree. because they are included in the arms, in development, or purchased in this year and previous years.
domestic production :

Sumadija (multiple rocket launcher) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumadija_ ... _launcher))

Hornet/Strsljen/X-01 Unmanned Helicopter (http://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi/ ... helicopter)

Aérospatiale Gazelle variants(SA 341H,SOKO HN-42M Gama,SOKO HN-45M Gama 2) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%C3%A9rospatiale_Gazelle)(purchased license from French)

Tank M84AS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-84AS)

Tank M84 AS1(https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-84AS1)

Short range air defense PASARS-16 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PASARS-16)

T-55/T-62 upgrade (http://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi/ ... de-package)

LRSVM Morava (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LRSVM_Morava)

SOKO SP RR 122mm truck-mounted howitzer( http://www.yugoimport.com/en/proizvodi/ ... d-howitzer) (https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-ec/%D0%9D%D ... _122mm.jpg)


And why all models M84 tank do not have the same design ? why new design 1769 not set for M84,PT-91 Twardy M 2001 (M84B) And M95 degman. they are the development of the same tank
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

Buzzbrad wrote: Nov 11 2018 After consideration, we are removing T group from Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo + Slovenia. Meaning they are only X group. I have gone through and adjusted some units to reflect this due to other feedback. This will be pushed with our next steam update.
What has been decided for Serbia about other countries? Will the some units be added to X compete in the Glogal Vision 2020 and the World 2020 scenario,because of the difference in the eras X(1949)T(2020)The X group is not well equipped for the modern scenario 2020 ? or simply the X units will be added to the T group,because they are in different eras and the T group is equipped for era of 2020 scenarios. In the last post, I entered the units which Serbia has developed over the past couple of years and some of it started to produce.
Regards.
User avatar
milivoje02
Colonel
Posts: 486
Joined: Oct 22 2018
Human: Yes
Location: Belgrade, RS

Re: T region group,East Europe Countries,Serbian teh tree.

Post by milivoje02 »

I'm talking to devolopers. X group is hedicated. Really the group is cruelly poor for 2020 scenario. I note the ignorance of devolopers it's their behavior and I will not go into it... that it was from the begin like this with group where Serbia,Croatia and rest ex Yu countries are,I would never have bought game on steam. I do not understand ? Why did you make such a handicapped group? Instead of improving it you made it the countries of EX YU are fighting with the weapons of 1950? that they do not have a new weapon in the future? other countries like Egypt,turky,Iran,Siriya,have optins for F 18 devolopment, Mig 29 devolopment,which is assumed to be possible for them to develop that airplanes and for X group conutries not ? I hit a lot of links with weapons that are serbia have dovolop,and you ingnored me.

Now that this is a bad situation. Can you do something with the X group,to be less handicapped,and to bee pleyable.
The T group was much more complete, for the X group It can be seen that she it from 1950.
I hope Devoloperi will not ignore me this time because there is a lot of damage done to countries that are put in the X group.
And it's really disappointing for all the players from countries that are affected by this.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - SRUltimate”