Pinned Chinese Tech Tree (Work In Progress)

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_63A -For amphibious combat vehicle

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changhe_Z-11#Variants -Last 2 variants on the list are attack helis,there are quite a few pics on google if you need them.

      The only other ASW heli they have is the Super Puma I think,but that's French.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_001A_aircraft_carrier -Being Constructed,upgraded Lianoing,also a Type 002 class being constructed,but no details were released.They also got the old Kiev-Class carrier,but it was turned into a Luxury Hotel :/

      Worse case-scenario you can use the J-15 as a naval strike fighter also,and use Russian Cruisers I guess.
      "I know not what weapons WW3 will be fought, but WW4 will be fought with sticks & stones."
      -Einstein
      "Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind."
      -Kennedy
      "There's a plot in this country to enslave every man, woman and child. Before I leave this high and noble office I intend to expose this plot."
      -Kennedy,week before his asassanation

    • Bacon230 wrote:

      The only other ASW heli they have is the Super Puma I think,but that's French.
      Yeah, I know, but I don't want to use foreign equipment. I guess I'll look for variants.

      Bacon230 wrote:

      orse case-scenario you can use the J-15 as a naval strike fighter also
      I think Imma have to do that,

      Bacon230 wrote:

      and use Russian Cruisers I guess.
      I really don't want to do that. I'd rather use old ships.


      #GoForThe18th

    • PLAN Navy Tech Tree, I've filled in the gaps with some Soviet tech and the Chinese do use some Russian Equipment in their Navy. I've also made some suggestions for changing the Russian tech tree to make it more distinctive from the Chinese one. I will edit this to include Picture attachments for the developers to use.



      Attack Submarines:
      Type 91 Han Class
      Type 93 Shang Class
      Type 97 Qin Class

      Ballistic Missile Submarines:
      Type 92 Xia Class
      Type 94 Jin Class
      Type 96 T*ng Class (Whole Word is censored but the * is A)

      Naval Strike Fighter:
      YAK-38
      J-15
      MiG-29K

      Naval Air Superiority Fighter:
      YAK-141
      Su-27K (Could just re-use the J-15)
      Su-33

      ASW helicopter:
      Z-9C
      Z-18
      Ka-27

      Aircraft Carrier:
      Kiev Class Aircraft Carrier
      Type 001 Liaoning
      Type 002 (Ulyanovsk class Aircraft carrier)

      For Developers:
      I would change the Modern Russian aircraft carrier from Ulyanovsk to Project 23000E Shtorm for the Russians and give the Chinese the Ulyanosvk class instead since it's likely the Chinese next generation aircraft carriers will based on those Soviet Designs whilst the Russians are designing a entirely new carrier

      A number of African and South East Asian Countries use Chinese Military equipment. For example Pakistan, Burma, Chad
      Files

      The post was edited 9 times, last by Lord Aodhan ().

    • Corvettes:
      Osa Class Cutter (Techincally Soviet design, but was produced and used by China)
      Type 37 Houjian class
      Type 56 Jiangdao class

      Frigates:
      Type 53 Jianghu class
      Type 53H Jiangwei II class
      Type 54A Jiangkai II class

      Destroyers:
      Type 051 Luda class
      Sovremenny class (Chinese use Sovremenny Destroyers as well)
      Type 052D Luyang III class


      Cruisers:
      Kresta II
      Slava (To outdated to be a modern Cruiser for either Russia or Chinese doctrines)
      Type 55

      For Developers:
      The Kara cruiser should be the Russian counterpart to this since both Cruisers are from the same era (Late 60s) and to create distinction between the doctrines despite both being Soviet ships. The Slava should be a middle cruiser for both the Russian and Chinese fleets. The Modern Russian Cruiser should be the Kirov Heavy Cruiser
      Files

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Lord Aodhan ().

    • Just to fill in some earlier blanks:
      Xian H-6M Bomber (You only had 2 heavy bombers, need 3)
      Xian H-8 Stealth Bomber

      Amphibious support vehicles:
      Type 63
      Type 63A
      ZBD2000

      Naval Patrol Aircraft:
      Harbin SH-5
      Y-8FQ
      Shaanxi Y-9
      Files

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Lord Aodhan ().

    • Best to keep the "fillers/ those not chinese" in a different colour or font or something
      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
      - Milton Friedman

      Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.
      - Sun Tzu

    • Pablo22510 wrote:

      I would make a number of changes to this list. 1. Your destroyers are all too close together in era and capability. The type 54 and type 54A frigates and type 56 corvettes are basically the same warship. The Lianoning and Type 0001A are both modified Admiral Kuznetsov AIrcraft Carriers and are once again too close in era, the type 002 Nuclear carrier should be modern carrier. The Chinese do have Kiev Aircraft carriers (They just never used them) so that the first aircraft carrier, the second can be the Type 001 Lianiong class. Your Attack Submarines are all diesel powered submarines as opposed to nuclear, I have made suggestions for Nuclear attack submarines. I have included a revised list which would balance out the Chinese warships in terms of era and capabilities. I've also solved some of your other blanks such as Naval patrol aircraft and Bombers.

    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      1. Your destroyers are all too close together in era and capability. The type 54 and type 54A frigates and type 56 corvettes are basically the same warship.
      They're different classes. The fact that they're very modern is done on purpose. I try to make it as modern as possible.

      Lord Aodhan wrote:

      The Lianoning and Type 0001A are both modified Admiral Kuznetsov AIrcraft Carriers and are once again too close in era, the type 002 Nuclear carrier should be modern carrier
      I might pick up on adding the Type 002, but I can't find a suitable link where it's described.

      Lord Aodhan wrote:

      our Attack Submarines are all diesel powered submarines as opposed to nuclear, I have made suggestions for Nuclear attack submarines. I have included a revised list which would balance out the Chinese warships in terms of era and capabilities. I've also solved some of your other blanks such as Naval patrol aircraft and Bombers.
      Where can I see these suggestions? I've been away for a couple of days, and I haven't seen the forum.


      #GoForThe18th

    • Pablo22510 wrote:

      They're different classes. The fact that they're very modern is done on purpose. I try to make it as modern as possible.
      But that doesn't make sense. You have to separate them in terms of age and capabilities like other tech trees, it's not simply about different classes. All lv.1 warships in other tech trees are from the 60's and 70's era. You haven't done that with your destroyers. They are all 80's to modern Warships. The Type 51C Destroyer just doesn't fit the tech tree formula. The point of this is when you research a new warship is a generation ahead of the old one. A generation can include multiple classes of warships which have minor improvement over one another. A generation resprents the next stage of military technology.
      The Luda class destroyer does fit in with other basic destroyers of other tech trees since it was launched in the 1970's. you have to have something old to have 2 things relativity new or modern. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_051_destroyer.

      You have done this with your Frigates and Corvettes.

      Pablo22510 wrote:

      I might pick up on adding the Type 002, but I can't find a suitable link where it's described.
      Yh this is the biggest problem I also noticed when I was looking through Chinese Aircraft and Submarine designs. China isn't particularly forthcoming when it comes down to Future Military design projects. So information is sparse. But the Chinese do plan to build a Nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier which is the Type 0002. There are already satellite pictures available of this new carrier under construction. The Type 0002 is believed to be based on designs of the Project 1143.7 Ulyanovsk class. The Ulyanovsk is a Nuclear powered CATOBAR Aircraft carrier that was meant to be the Soviet Union's answer to the US Nimitz class super carriers. But the USSR Broke up before work on the carrier could begin. Soviet Aircraft carriers were built in Ukraine and Ukraine sold it's unfinished Admiral Kuznetsov(Varyag) class carrier to China which became the Lianiong and carrier designs for the Kutuzov so they could build more and reportedly designs for the the Ulyanovsk class as well.

      aviationweek.com/awin/china-has-plans-five-carriers

      Two Kiev class aircraft carriers are preserved in China. (Minsk and Kiev)

      Using two Kuznetsov aircraft carriers as China's basic and advanced Aircraft carriers doesn't make sense compared to the Eastern (Russian) Tech tree which has a Kiev and then Kuznetsov.
      So I would use:
      Kiev
      Type 001A
      Type 002

      Pablo22510 wrote:

      Where can I see these suggestions? I've been away for a couple of days, and I haven't seen the forum.
      The suggestions solving your earlier blanks are further up the thread (You will have to scroll up sadly). Although your suggestions for attack submarines are great the developers of this game decided to use only Nuclear attack submarines. I suspect because the USA (Western doctrine) stopped building conventionally powered diesel submarines a long time ago so there would be no comparative American modern conventional attack submarines to fill out a Western Doctrine. China does have Nuclear powered attack submarines though and I have given replacements once again further up. But to save you time:
      Attack Submarines (Nuclear Powered)
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_091_submarine
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_093_submarine
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_095_submarine

      You only had 3 Heavy Bombers, so here is the third:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-8
      However this aircraft replacement was never built, so you could just use the extensively modernized H-6M

      Chinese Stealth Bomber
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-20

      Naval Patrol Aircraft:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_SH-5
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-8
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-9

      Cruisers:
      These Soviet cruisers can be used as substitutes since China has no other Cruisers
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresta_II-class_cruiser
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slava-class_cruiser
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_055_destroyer
      The type 55 is called a destroyer by the Chinese, but it's big enough to be classified as a cruiser and that's the USN are classifying it as if it turns out to be as bigger as China as suggesting it will be.


      The developers got the cruisers wrong for the Eastern doctrine. The Kresta II and Kara Cruisers are both from the 1960's and the Slava is a less advanced counterpart to the Kirov Cruiser (which should be the modern Eastern Cruiser)
      So I've changed the Cruiser Tech tree for Eastern Doctrine to:
      Kara
      Slava
      Kirov
      This means China will get two unique Cruisers in it's Tech Tree, but will share the Slava class Cruiser with Russian Doctrine. The Developers could change up the Russian naval tech tree since the Lider class Destroyer will actually be a cruiser so in which case Russians will have Kara, Kirov and Lider and Chinese will have Kresta II, Slava and Type 55.

      The post was edited 13 times, last by Lord Aodhan ().

    • Lord Aodhan wrote:

      Pablo22510 wrote:

      They're different classes. The fact that they're very modern is done on purpose. I try to make it as modern as possible.
      But that doesn't make sense. You have to separate them in terms of age and capabilities like other tech trees, it's not simply about different classes. All lv.1 warships in other tech trees are from the 60's and 70's era. You haven't done that with your destroyers. They are all 80's to modern Warships. The Type 51C Destroyer just doesn't fit the tech tree formula. The point of this is when you research a new warship is a generation ahead of the old one. A generation can include multiple classes of warships which have minor improvement over one another. A generation resprents the next stage of military technology.The Luda class destroyer does fit in with other basic destroyers of other tech trees since it was launched in the 1970's. you have to have something old to have 2 things relativity new or modern. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_051_destroyer.

      You have done this with your Frigates and Corvettes.

      Pablo22510 wrote:

      I might pick up on adding the Type 002, but I can't find a suitable link where it's described.
      Yh this is the biggest problem I also noticed when I was looking through Chinese Aircraft and Submarine designs. China isn't particularly forthcoming when it comes down to Future Military design projects. So information is sparse. But the Chinese do plan to build a Nuclear powered CATOBAR Carrier which is the Type 0002. There are already satellite pictures available of this new carrier under construction. The Type 0002 is believed to be based on designs of the Project 1143.7 Ulyanovsk class. The Ulyanovsk is a Nuclear powered CATOBAR Aircraft carrier that was meant to be the Soviet Union's answer to the US Nimitz class super carriers. But the USSR Broke up before work on the carrier could begin. Soviet Aircraft carriers were built in Ukraine and Ukraine sold it's unfinished Admiral Kuznetsov(Varyag) class carrier to China which became the Lianiong and carrier designs for the Kutuzov so they could build more and reportedly designs for the the Ulyanovsk class as well.
      aviationweek.com/awin/china-has-plans-five-carriers

      Two Kiev class aircraft carriers are preserved in China. (Minsk and Kiev)

      Using two Kuznetsov aircraft carriers as China's basic and advanced Aircraft carriers doesn't make sense compared to the Eastern (Russian) Tech tree which has a Kiev and then Kuznetsov.
      So I would use:
      Kiev
      Type 001A
      Type 002

      Pablo22510 wrote:

      Where can I see these suggestions? I've been away for a couple of days, and I haven't seen the forum.
      The suggestions solving your earlier blanks are further up the thread (You will have to scroll up sadly). Although your suggestions for attack submarines are great the developers of this game decided to use only Nuclear attack submarines. I suspect because the USA (Western doctrine) stopped building conventionally powered diesel submarines a long time ago so there would be no comparative American modern conventional attack submarines to fill out a Western Doctrine. China does have Nuclear powered attack submarines though and I have given replacements once again further up. But to save you time:Attack Submarines (Nuclear Powered)
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_091_submarine
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_093_submarine
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_095_submarine

      You only had 3 Heavy Bombers, so here is the third:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-8
      However this aircraft replacement was never built, so you could just use the extensively modernized H-6M

      Chinese Stealth Bomber
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-20

      Naval Patrol Aircraft:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_SH-5
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-8
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-9

      Cruisers:
      These Soviet cruisers can be used as substitutes since China has no other Cruisers
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresta_II-class_cruiser
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slava-class_cruiser
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_055_destroyer
      The type 55 is called a destroyer by the Chinese, but it's big enough to be classified as a cruiser and that's the USN are classifying it as if it turns out to be as bigger as China as suggesting it will be.


      The developers got the cruisers wrong for the Eastern doctrine. The Kresta II and Kara Cruisers are both from the 1960's and the Slava is a less advanced counterpart to the Kirov Cruiser (which should be the modern Eastern Cruiser)
      So I've changed the Cruiser Tech tree for Eastern Doctrine to:
      Kara
      Slava
      Kirov
      This means China will get two unique Cruisers in it's Tech Tree, but will share the Slava class Cruiser with Russian Doctrine. The Developers could change up the Russian naval tech tree since the Lider class Destroyer will actually be a cruiser so in which case Russians will have Kara, Kirov and Lider and Chinese will have Kresta II, Slava and Type 55.
      God bless you, man!


      #GoForThe18th