Spending Spree (NOT OFFICIAL!!!!)

[Sachmle]

I think a solution for someone in Korpen's situation would be to have smaller bases w/ shipbuilding/repairing capacity centrally located to build/service the fleet, with larger "Fleet" bases w/o infrastructure located as to allow the most flexible use of the actual fleet. Some nations w/ smaller coasts may be able to get away w/ consolidating these 2 types into 1 base and having fewer total bases.

I make this suggestion due to the fact that I notice that there are no longer rules stating that your base must be similar sized or larger than the largest slip/drydock located at it as previously. I personally see this as more accurate. Used to be that to have a type 4 slip you had to have a type 4 base, but now that doesn't seem to be the case. So, you can build the smallest size base (10,000t?) and load it up w/ slips/docks (within reason) and then build bigger bases w/o slips/docks to actually anchor the fleet where it can be most useful. It still requires quite a few bases, but mostly smaller ones for detachments and supporting elements (Like Harwich force in WWI) with fewer Large bases (Like Scapa Flow/Pearl Harbor).

[Korpen]

I see I forgot the smiley after the 'strict reading of the rules' line.  That would change what questions you ask here I think.  Also more detail in the answer, I was pressed for time and didn't explain more.  I am sorry, my bad.

No worries!

Why do you feel the need to have so many bases and with so much support?  Seriously I don't see the need for a million tons of support capacity Korpen.  I don't see the need to achieve that type of concentration at will along your ENTIRE coast line.

Oh, I agree that it overall is more then needed.
There are several parallel reasons that inflates the number.
First of all: Ice, Both Helsingfors and Stockholm freeze quite early and hard, by new year operations would be severely restricted, and by mid January they are both in solid ice most of the time. Given that ports along the Baltic coast only freeze by the middle of February most of the time it would mean that such a force could operate with impunity against the outlaying cost and (potentially lethal to the country) Åland.
Hence the need for forward bases in the area with access to open water (Fårösund, Mariehamn and Hangö), and one do NOT want to spend a winter in any of those spots without some access to basing facilities (in the sailing era about 65% casualties was the norm for a winter aboard ship).

Another aspect is that a fight in the Baltic is a bit like a melee in an elevator, there is very little room to move about. If a own base is more then twice as far from important ports as the enemy bas just across the sea it is very little that can be done to prevent an enemy from raiding at will.

There is also the fact that there are different threat vectors, from Russia in the Gulf of Finland (east), Poland into the central Baltic (south-east) and Germany from the South and West. Finally there is the UK across the North Sea and against Iceland and the Faeroe islands. So about one main base to allow for concentration in each direction. And local geography mean that their ability to supplement each other is very low.

[miketr]

I think Sachmle has once concept that might work for people.  Korpen does have a point also.  The problem is there is not going to be one fits everyone perfect solution.  Large amount of Ice, etc are going to create problems for Baltic nations.  Other nations will have different challenges. Best we can hope for I feel is a solution that works in most cases.

Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to improve the naval infrastructure setup?  Anything at all?

Michael

[snip]

One thing I have noticed is that the upkeep for drydocks is just killer. My only suggestion would be to look into lowering it, my preferred choice would be 5% as opposed to 10%.

[Walter]

Assumption is there are no such ships under construction.  Otherwise the book keeping gets annoying as you have pointed out.  They have finished and are in service at whatever level you want.

So in a sense, what you're saying is that a 10,000 ton ship laid down on December 31, 1879 is complete January 1, 1880. A ship built in a day. :)

[Valles]

And for the sake of the game, we agree not to investigate the matter too closely?

Works for me.

[Desertfox]

What if we have fleet anchorages and shipyards. Fleet anchorages can support X amount of tonnage but can not have docks and slips, while shipyards have to have slips or docks but can't support any tonnage. If a base is to have both slips and docks and support a fleet then it has to have both options.

[snip]

What if we have fleet anchorages and shipyards. Fleet anchorages can support X amount of tonnage but can not have docks and slips, while shipyards have to have slips or docks but can't support any tonnage. If a base is to have both slips and docks and support a fleet then it has to have both options.

To complicated, as upkeep will need to be payed on both anyway.

[Valles]

All right, let's try a first-pass effort:

ITEM                            PRICE           FUNDS REMAINING UPKEEP
9 1880 Army Corps (Reg)         $202.5          $797.5          ($81)
3 1880 Army Corps (Res)         $67.5           $730            ($3)
1 Depot Brigade (Reg)           $8              $722            ($3.6)
5 1880 Constable Brigades (Reg) $11.25          $710.75         ($2)
3 2-citadel 1880 fort (Res)     $6.75           $704            ($0.3)
                                                                {$89.9/232.6}

5 212.1x42.4x9.09m Drydocks     $247.5          $456.5          ($2.5)
10 10,000 ton support bases     $20             $436.5          ($2)
2 50,000 ton support bases      $20             $416.5          ($2)
1 100,000 ton support base      $20             $396.5          ($2)
                                                                {$8.5}

5 Full Warships (Act)           $25             $371.5          ($1.25)
30 Commerce Protection (Act)    $15             $356.5          ($0.75
                                                                {$2/8}

War Reserve (6mo/full/x2)       $241.1          $115.4          (-)
Rollover                        $115.4          $0              (-)


Minor Bases
Paramushiru-to
Akou (Alexandrovsk-Sakhalinsky)
Etorofu-to
Aomori
Nanao
Chiba
Maizuru
Kobe
Yakushima
Ishigaki


Secondary Bases
Naha (+Fort, 1xDrydock)
Abashiri (+Fort, 1xDrydock)


Primary Base
Hiroshima (+Fort, 3xDrydock)

[snip]

Im curious as to what this war reserve is. AFAIK, we are only allowed to bank away 5% of our GDP, nothing else

[Valles]

Possibly I've misremembered or misread a rule somewhere, yes. I'd recalled that it was allowed to bank six months - one turn's worth - of fuel, supplies, ammunition, etc for wartime combat operations, and that this wasn't 'general money' but represented actual materiel already bought.

If I'm wrong, then I guess the money's wasted, 'cause there ain't really anything else I can spend it on without going over 3.5% tax burden in maintenance costs.

[snip]

IIRC, (which may not be the case) that was in regard to what came with the standard upkeep for N3 corps in wartime. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also, I think turns are going to be a year this time around, which is what I recall hearing.

[ctwaterman]

Turns are 1 year long......

Ouch 9 Fully Modern Regular Corp at Full Time Readiness....??????

[Desertfox]

Someone's economy won't be growing very much...

[Korpen]

Turns are 1 year long......

Ouch 9 Fully Modern Regular Corp at Full Time Readiness....??????

Well, not that strange, also the total number of corps (about 12-14) would pretty much be what is "normal" at this time and population. Also, the quality of the corp. do not affect it upkeep.

I think Sachmle has once concept that might work for people.  Korpen does have a point also.  The problem is there is not going to be one fits everyone perfect solution.  Large amount of Ice, etc are going to create problems for Baltic nations.  Other nations will have different challenges. Best we can hope for I feel is a solution that works in most cases.

Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to improve the naval infrastructure setup?  Anything at all?

Well the easiest way would be to allow for bases in reasonably close proximity to pool their support most purposes. I am think it could be handled on a case-by-case basis as long as one talk to each other and can agree on what is reasonable.