CAN, CAF, AST, NZL, SAF, RAJ - Errors, Typos and Missing Text for Infantry Equipment

[Tehrozer]

Quick questions HOI4 version:1.10.8 Kaiserreich version: 0.19 List any other mods used: None

Explanation of the issue: Related to issue #16655 There are multiple issues I will try to group them into rough categories:

General:

• [ ] 1. It seems that Canada and Australasia use a different set of localisation than the rest of the British Empire while it was intended to keep infantry equipment standardised. I am not sure why this happened I suppose it is possible someone made changes to the Canadian and Australasian tech list but forgot to carry them over to other tags something that seems rather likely considering the alternative list does not match the new GFX and contains a large amounts of various errors. I suggest to use the option that pulls the name from a different loc string example like the one used for German colonies and UBD (BAT_gw_tank_equipment:0 "$GER_gw_tank_equipment$") for the names as this will ensure that this issue will not be repeated in the future. As to the descriptions as it seems each country is getting a unique one then those have to be written as the second list descriptions won't really do and the descriptions for Canada and Australasia would only work for those respective countries.

Missing Text:

• [ ] 1. Australiasia lacks any localisation for Improved Infantry Equipment I, II and II
• [ ] 2. Tabby Scope lacks description and Night Vision II lacks any localisation. Not sure whether it is a issue or it was intended as my suggestion regarding changing the night vision equipment were received favourably but it might be that they just weren't finished nevertheless seeing other issues related to this implementation I decided to report it anyhow.
• [ ] 3. Idk if that is intended but it seems that Infantry Equipment upgrades and AT tech do not have short name localisation strings. Think would be a good idea to add them seeing that most if not all other countries always have both a short and a long name localised.

Typos:

• [x] 1. In the localisation the Mark designation is shortened in four different ways "MK.I", "Mk.I", "Mk. I" and "Mk I" only the last is the correct version used by the British Empire so it should be implemented across the board.
• [x] 2. In the description of the Lanchester in the last sentence the gun is incorrectly referred to as 'Lancester'.
• [ ] 3. "Projector Infantry Tank Attack" for Australasia is missing it's "Mk I" it should be "Projector Infantry Tank Attack Mk I"

Wrong Name:

• [ ] 1. "Grenade, Rifle, Anti-tank, Mk.I" is not a correct name it should be named "Grenade, Rifle, Anti-tank No. 68". In this case I know exactly how the issue came about in my suggestion @Vidyaorszag explained that he opposes using the OTL post 1925 British equipment terminology of No. X Mk Y for Canada and rest of the Empire. While I can understand that in this case the name is actually already using the pre-1925 terminology. Grenades were designated by No. X in British Service since before even the Great War and the OTL change from 1925 was only for the Lee-Metford/Lee-Enfield Rifles so there is no reason to not use the OTL name for the No. 68.
• [ ] 2. De Lisle Carbine was never officially named a "Commando" Carbine therefore the name should be "Carbine, De Lisle Mk I"
• [ ] 3. For AST and RAJ some weapons contain factory names in the form of "Ishapore" and "LSAF" which are incorrect. These were not used in official designations and SMLE was always a SMLE regardless of where it was produced. Furthermore Ishapore is not even in Dominion of India territory (nor would it be in the frozen Indian rework) and of course neither Ishapore nor LSAF were the only factories producing weapons in their respective countries making these names even weirder.
• [ ] 4. In the description for the Canadian Thompson it is called a M1926 while the tech itself refers to it as "Carbine, Machine, Thompson Mk.I". It probably would be a good idea to add a bit saying that M1926 was the original name while the weapon was later renamed to Thompson Machine Carbine to avoid confusion.

Lore:

• [ ] 1. Shouldn't the Mk VI occupy be in the 1942 slot? It doesn't really make sense as a 1936 rifle as it came about due to having to fight the Japanese in the jungles of Asia something Australasia didn't yet experience at the start of the game. Even the description says it was developed after the Canadian Mk V and due to "experience in jungle warfare" so idk if this was even intended to be in the 1936 slot might be another error?
• [ ] 2. The description of Canadian Mk V says that the rifle was created only after the Revolution while it has been already finished and rejected prior to the revolution OTL. The description says it was "relatively expensive" which I guess is a bit of a misunderstanding the rifle wasn't simply costly it was more costly than the Mk III which is why it was rejected OTL. Furthermore in the original suggestion post it seemed like No. 4/Mk VI Lee-Enfield would be the rifle for 1936 so I am unsure whether this was even supposed to be a Mk V or it is someone just mistaking the two.

A note regarding the starting tech unlocks: Going trough the various British Empire countries I noticed that they have a extreme disparity in regard to what technologies they have unlocked at start. Seeing as they seem to continue to share equipment it might make more sense to keep the 1936 unlocks rather similar for these countries.

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it was created more than a month ago. Any dev is now free to relabel, close or implement it.

[adrianator22]

As Discussed in relevant channel from Vidya

General: Was not copy-pasted due to the descriptions between CAN and AST assumption someone would want to give the AST one flavour in the future

Missing Text: Waiting for country specific flavour

Wrong name: 2) "This is not correct. The markings even say "THE DE LISLE 'COMMANDO' CARBINE." Besides, I don't believe it ever got a formal designation since it wasn't formally adopted." 3) "Pretty sure Ishapore and LSAF were the only factories in their respective countries making SMLEs :thinbing: Besides, flavour." 4) The M1926 name was the factory designation from Auto-Ordnance, not the British designation (it wasn't adopted either)

Lore: 1) "No simply because, as I've said numerous times, the date of adoption isn't necessarily the year of the tech. The Jungle Carbine is not comparable to other 1942 slots at all and is more comparable to slot 2 where other short rifles/carbines are." 2) Not exactly true. It's not that it was rejected per se, but that it was developed further into what became the No.4 later down the line. If it had been rejected, development would've stopped. Canada's in a pickle because they have the documents/parts for the Mk V but can't develop it further, so they adopt it as-is.