Conserns about sim speed

[Kaiser Kirk]

Various ideas and my comments thereon.


1.  Alternate world geography, or same world geography with higher sealevels etc etc.
From my perspective, I don't see the need, and I haven't seen anyone try to explain why this is needed.  There is a wealth of data about our current geography. It's work to make a new geography, so there should be a compelling reason.

1a.  I want a nations principle harbors to have depths assigned. As well as major straits and canals.

2. Same states/different states etc .. here I could see Ahistorical being ok. Once we have a map we can draw the empire.

3. Tech Tree.
  3a . I fall under the keep the current tree party.
  3b.  I like the idea of the steps being sequential, not fixed in time...
      3b(1) but in some techs there are very large gaps, so there could be people very far ahead.  That is undesirable.
      3b(2) The current system allows you to be caught up in roughly twice the # of techs as your research budget. Bavaria, for example, can master most of the Land techs.  If techs are sequential, then there is a likelyhood that people will specialize, to get ahead in that tech, then trade it out to keep caught up elsewhere...pushing the entire tech curve forward.
      3b(3).  I think I'd rather see countries get to choose a specialty, and be able to start researching that 1-2 years earlier. Those are the countries that lead the curve.
  3c.  Regarding small powers inability to keep up in techs...well, yes.  Thats why there were, and are, weapons export markets. Either that or find friends that will give you techs. It's perfectly possible to be world beating thanks to a genius or two in a field or two. Not all of them.  OTL Netherlands was actually a leader in Radar technology, in large part due to being the home of this little company called Phillips Electronics.
  3d.  Perhaps tying research to IC,  or population, or $ ..not the heavy industrial base is more appropriate.

4.  Use Navweaps Guns only.
Don't like it.
Part of the allure of Navalism to me is fielding my own darn guns.  Now if we want to standardize on a program for official stats, that's okey dokey with me...I'm going to use BigGun.  Not because it's magically accurate, but because its easy and I need to know relative performance, not "true" performance.  In 1920 'true' performance wasn't terribly well known yet. The Mods can use something else to generate 'official' numbers.

4. Great powers vs. Medium states vs. Small states.
I think a goal of 3-4 Great Powers being mod controlled aloof neutrals, and the PC nations being 'powers'  - Mid-large nations among a patchwork of smaller states is what to shoot for.
Threat of Great power involvement could encourage wars to be short.
There's too many players to all be "great powers"... we'd balance each other and wind up just Powers anyhow.

Mid-large nations would allow a player to build a variety of ships while still watching the budget and having to make choices.  I look at Wesworld's UK and I wouldn't want that job, waaaay to many ships to track.  Some go further and *want* small, easy states, they tend to be new or storytellers.

5. Straight Cash.
Don't like it.
I prefer Navalism's BP & IC to Wesworlds IP.   Traditionally, there was a cap on fine machined steel a nation could produce and that could be different than the funds the nation could raise. Many nations are awash in cash from resource economies but lack an industrial base.  Just because you have oodles of cash doesn't mean you can build a battleship. The current system allows population inputs to be differentiated from industrial outputs. I find that handy.
People with Excess Cash now can already order BP output or order export vessels.

6. Timeline
I prefer 1890.  Start with the oldest ships.  I've seen an advocate for 1920.  I'd rather go early than late.  By time you get to the 1940s, planes and subs are taking a prominent role, and they just aren't as interesting to me.  Midway through you get to guided missles. Neat gadgets, nice to read about, but I know how WWII ships performed, so if I have to restart, I want to start as far from there as I can.

[Logi]

I'm working on an comprehensive economic proposal, but it's still in writing. I'll post it in a separate thread once it's done.

It'll require a program written to ease the flow of change. But it would just be a basic calculator program, nothing hard.

[P3D]

As a note, I count at least three or four different proposals mentioned on this thread besides the semi-official N4verse rules (with an economical model that mostly done).

About technology, it could be done essentially two ways. Which approach is WORSE of the following two?

a/ The first is a tech-based system, with a tech tree that might be completely different from the n3verse one. Or essentially the same.

b/ The second would split technologies into a few fields/subfields, and people could assign a priority to each, with  limited freedom to change priorities. The time that a specific application would be available would depend on the priority assigned to the field.  For example, a nation that puts priority into naval propulsion would be able to lay down Dreadnought a turbine-powered all big-gun battleship 5 years ahead of those who did not put any specific effort into it.

The second option requires less beancounting. However, the tech tree system is more rewarding, I could say "I decided to develop turbines 3 years ago, now I can lay down a battleship that is 3kts faster than the competition". Instead of "with the high priority assigned half a year ago IRL I can now build turbines with a specific power of 20SHP/ton". The tech tree also gives more flexibility, allowing Research Centers (TM) to switch to investigate weaponized Plague after developing wet-heater torpedoes.

[ctwaterman]

That said, if the mods wanted to impose a Versailles-esque settlement, I could work with that - probably Hawaii, Papua, and any further 'native'-inhabited insular territories, permission to carry off every industrial tool and die in Phoenix and Olympia, complete technical data, and something like $200 military, would be my set terms.

Wow...  I think the UNK was trying to work on a Peace Initiative but having read your Decleration of war there was simply no way that the UNK was going to incourage future expansion.

But since the attempt to form a Coalition opposed to the war is going extremely slowly an ultimatium has not yet been issued.

But Given that your opening terms seem to be the equivelant of allowing you to take the Swiss Home Islands anyway and handinging most everything else you wanted on the side I would have to say Bloody Hell No....

[ctwaterman]

Logi expressed my feelings pretty well.  I agree that there need to be small nations and large nations.  But why can't I, as a small nation, field a small but technologically advanced military?  Because I can't afford the IC and BP to sustain massive long-term research programs.  Its not that I think being smaller is unfair, its the restriction on R&D that seems to me to be unfair.  I can max out my R&D budget every year and I'll never catch up with the big boys, even in only one type of technology. 

Israel is the Example you are looking for but with a few exceptions and roughly 60 years of investment they have a healthy Military Industrial Complex.   But if you will pay attention for many years they purchased their Tanks and ships from the US or Europe and still to this day buy US Aircraft.  Certain investments are still beyond the small nations.  And having a Big Friend who effectively hands you a couple of Billion Dollars to spend on US built equipment every years does sort of help Israel doesnt it.....

[Logi]

There is a difference between buying equipment and being so backwards you don't have near the same technological level. In other words, it's that a small nation might have the technology to compete, but not the resources to make blueprints into actuality.

Israel is the Example you are looking for but with a few exceptions and roughly 60 years of investment they have a healthy Military Industrial Complex.   But if you will pay attention for many years they purchased their Tanks and ships from the US or Europe and still to this day buy US Aircraft.  Certain investments are still beyond the small nations.  And having a Big Friend who effectively hands you a couple of Billion Dollars to spend on US built equipment every years does sort of help Israel doesnt it.....

[Desertfox]

I might point out that Mexico developed semi-automatic rifles almost 25 years before anyone else. Unfortunately no money to build them.

[ctwaterman]

Ok...

Someone Asked why behind Closed doors...

And Given that I have seen so far at least 3 or 4 proposals from different coalitions people might begin to understand why closed doors were a good Idea.

1.  It didnt immediately stop the SIM... in my experience as a roleplayer once people start asking what are we going to play in the next game, the current game is now officially over and the squabling over what next begins.   If you dont believe me ask Miketr what happened to the High Level 3.5 D&D game 2 weeks ago. :o

2.  Again Miketr said it properly too many Chefs ruins the sauce.   We closed a couple of rules advocates up in a private forum threw in one Knife and said come up with some rules.   Supprisingly they didnt even need the Knife... ;)

[Valles]

That said, if the mods wanted to impose a Versailles-esque settlement, I could work with that - probably Hawaii, Papua, and any further 'native'-inhabited insular territories, permission to carry off every industrial tool and die in Phoenix and Olympia, complete technical data, and something like $200 military, would be my set terms.

Wow...  I think the UNK was trying to work on a Peace Initiative but having read your Decleration of war there was simply no way that the UNK was going to incourage future expansion.

But since the attempt to form a Coalition opposed to the war is going extremely slowly an ultimatium has not yet been issued.

But Given that your opening terms seem to be the equivelant of allowing you to take the Swiss Home Islands anyway and handinging most everything else you wanted on the side I would have to say Bloody Hell No....

Then what would be 'reasonable'? Hawaii and Papua are there for political, 'in character' reasons; the industrial clause is more important than the cash settlement, but both are aimed at the other main goal of the war - with both, I'd be set up to solidly beat the DKB. I'm not just picking hysterical claims out of a hat, here, but working towards a specific long-term goal in what - I hope! - will be the least complicated way.

Note to self: Include 'final objectives' and logic in some of my diplomacy writing.

[snip]

Ok...

Someone Asked why behind Closed doors...

And Given that I have seen so far at least 3 or 4 proposals from different coalitions people might begin to understand why closed doors were a good Idea.

1.  It didnt immediately stop the SIM... in my experience as a roleplayer once people start asking what are we going to play in the next game, the current game is now officially over and the squabling over what next begins.   If you dont believe me ask Miketr what happened to the High Level 3.5 D&D game 2 weeks ago. :o

2.  Again Miketr said it properly too many Chefs ruins the sauce.   We closed a couple of rules advocates up in a private forum threw in one Knife and said come up with some rules.   Supprisingly they didnt even need the Knife... ;)

In response to this regarding Tex and my proposal:

We have been working on this for some time without sharing. I finally got tired of waiting for something to happen and decided to post this thread to see what people thought. After seeing what people had to say, Tex figured it was time to reveal what we had been working on.

In general: Things did effectively stop for some time, so this thread was my attempt to kickstart a conversation on the subject and hopefully get some results. Apparently I succeed in the former, the latter remains to be seen.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Well what I'm seeing is folks heading in multiple directions, all with what they think are good ideas....
Some of which I agree with and some of which I'd just wish them luck with.

I might point out that Mexico developed semi-automatic rifles almost 25 years before anyone else. Unfortunately no money to build them.

True, and I'd say apparently where Mexico put it's research point :)

Currently, Small countries can keep in the forefront of modern tech ...in a limited number of fields. It's just there's too many fields for a small research base.
Though I am thinking IC is probably a better basis than BP.

[Jefgte]

 :'(  :'(  :'(

The end of a dream...
Adios Atahualpa, Amazonas & Putre...

Adios NUS

:'(  :'(  :'(

-------------------------------------

A new deam is going to start

:D  :D  :D

[ctwaterman]

The N4 discussion board has been running for well years would be the operative word....

with discussions and arguements and then lots of Economic and Historic Research and then proposals counter proposals... threats to get that Knife I mentioned and then compromise.