Question for the Community

[Jefgte]

First SS in 1905.
Start the game in 1910.

I play France

I reuse the last 1/3 part of Nova Francia Plan.

Jef  ;)

[Delta Force]

What does tilted axis refer to in the geography poll? Is that stuff like Antarctica being an ice free island chain in the tropics?

[Darman]

I think so. 

[snip]

So, here is what I am seeing from the polls so far.

It looks like a real-earth or real earth with slight alterations both Geographically and Politically is the desired setting. Also, it looks like a Dreadnaught-era start is most popular, but to what side of Dreadnaught is still up for mulling over. With that in mind, I would like to begin assembling a list of nations that would be in the game. Here are my thoughts, with some notes about how history would need to be altered to make some viable. Note this does not necessarily include the value of colonial possessions.

Need Players from the getgo. I feel that given a real-earth setting, these nations need to be covered from the start.
United Kingdom
United States of America
France
Japan
Germany
Russia(with an earlier start. Later start maybe?)
Spain/Iberia (with an earlier start. Later start would see them moved below)

Expantion nations/regions. I feel that these areas are not as important as the main powers, but could be plausable for development later in the sim. These should not be player nations at start, but not really part of any colonial empire. Good places for new players, should any happen along.
China
ABC Nations
India
Other more independent and self sufficient OTL colonies (ie. Canada)
Fictitious nations formed in other regions

As it seems that we would like to for the most part leave most of history alone, I feel that it would be slightly illogical and ahistorical to do fleets compleatly of the players design for given nations. That being said, I do not want to saddle any player with historical designs that they do not want. As a compromise, I propose that if a player wishes that they be allowed to build new designs as replacements for the OTL designs as long as they designs are close in size to there OTL counterparts and use historical weapons. I think this would allow those who want to use OTL designs and those who want to have there own navies the most flexibility to get something off the ground in a reasonable time.

Some other thoughts I have about the governense of the sim moving forward. If it is only going to be me as a mod/gamemaster/egghead-with-the-rules, there will be no siming of conflicts big or small. I do not have the time to do it, and also should my nation become involved it puts me in a very difficult position. All conflict would need to be scripted or otherwise resolved between the involved parties. If simming is something people want, then we will need to come up with a solution. I would also like to use the econ rules that I wrote/adapted for N4.5, as I know the system well. If there is any objection to this, please speak up so other options may be discussed. Third, I would like to avoid tech trees, or overall binding treaties and other such items for controlling tech. Original Time Line would and will be the final arbiter if the feasibility of a design or technology is called into question. Obviously some modifications will have to be made in the case of wars that don't (or do) happen in comparison to OTL. If this is an issue, once again please speak up so alternatives can be discussed. Other questions or comments that I have missed or not addressed?

[KWorld]

Not sure where Italy, A-H, and Turkey should go on your list of countries: Turkey probably to the expansion list, but the other two could go in either list.


Couple issues, as I see it:

1st - be careful about limiting to historical/near-historical designs, because it's possible the player may have a completely different idea than the historical fleet commanders did.  Example: historically Germany built a large battle line, when it's arguable whether or not that was the "best" move for Germany (as it was a cause of tension with the UK).


2nd - If we're going to use mostly historical nations, we may need to make changes at the edges of the nations to keep the size differentials down.

[snip]

1st - be careful about limiting to historical/near-historical designs, because it's possible the player may have a completely different idea than the historical fleet commanders did.  Example: historically Germany built a large battle line, when it's arguable whether or not that was the "best" move for Germany (as it was a cause of tension with the UK).

It is just the simplest way to do it. Unless we compleatly want to rework history, some things might have to be kept that are not liked to much. In this example, an earlier start would allow the German player to not build the historical battleline, but they would still need to have the pre-dreads that lead to it. Providing for the reworking of individual designs allows for the player to model the fleet on there doctrine, but allows us to keep the OTL economic data to use as a baseline for setting up the game economic system.

2nd - If we're going to use mostly historical nations, we may need to make changes at the edges of the nations to keep the size differentials down.

I asume you mean the discrepancy in fleet sizes? If not, please explain this more.

Not sure where Italy, A-H, and Turkey should go on your list of countries: Turkey probably to the expansion list, but the other two could go in either list.

Italy would be the only one I would add to the Starting Nations with some thought. They bore mention in Washington, so it makes sense to have them here. On the other hand, there Navy was mostly active in the Med so there role as a "power" is up in the air. I'm willing to hear arguments. The Turks are correctly religated to the secondary counties. A-H has always seemed more of a land power to me, and would also most likely be religated to the secondary countries. It just does not have a powerful enough navy to justify creating another slot to fill. I want to leave the least number of major powers vacant at the start of the sim as posible.

[Darman]

What about OTL designs that don't belong to our nation?  Can we use them? Or do we have to stick with our nation's OTL design history?

And I know I'd prefer UK or Japan but because I'm at best a mediocre designer I'd like Japan... unless we're not offering up nations we would choose yet. 

[snip]

What about OTL designs that don't belong to our nation?  Can we use them? Or do we have to stick with our nation's OTL design history?

And I know I'd prefer UK or Japan but because I'm at best a mediocre designer I'd like Japan... unless we're not offering up nations we would choose yet. 

The only requerment that I can see at this time (may change if it is abused), would be that the designs that replace historical ones be of similar size and use historical weapons. Beyond that, I would say keep it within reason for the time frame.

Im not quite ready to begin dolling out nations yet as I want a bit more info on what things are going to look like economic between nations (ie. I dont really want a loose cannon at the helm of the UK or US if they have the economic advantages they had in OTL considering how they would be able to leverage that advantage), tho preference will be noted. *pulls out popcorn for if anyone tries to challenge Jef for France*

[KWorld]

1st - be careful about limiting to historical/near-historical designs, because it's possible the player may have a completely different idea than the historical fleet commanders did.  Example: historically Germany built a large battle line, when it's arguable whether or not that was the "best" move for Germany (as it was a cause of tension with the UK).

It is just the simplest way to do it. Unless we compleatly want to rework history, some things might have to be kept that are not liked to much. In this example, an earlier start would allow the German player to not build the historical battleline, but they would still need to have the pre-dreads that lead to it. Providing for the reworking of individual designs allows for the player to model the fleet on there doctrine, but allows us to keep the OTL economic data to use as a baseline for setting up the game economic system.

2nd - If we're going to use mostly historical nations, we may need to make changes at the edges of the nations to keep the size differentials down.

I asume you mean the discrepancy in fleet sizes? If not, please explain this more.

     Fleet sizes and economies, both.  Ie, if you go with a historical start, in 1900-1915, the UK is unchallengeable at sea.  They have the largest fleet and the ability to outbuild any challenger.    That's historically, of course.  If we're trying to come up with a more "balanced" universe, the Empire could be reduced in scope, moving possessions either to other owners or to independence as needed.

[Darman]

Well I'm definitely not a loose cannon.... I'm very precise and I only hit exactly what I aim at....

The only requerment that I can see at this time (may change if it is abused), would be that the designs that replace historical ones be of similar size and use historical weapons. Beyond that, I would say keep it within reason for the time frame.

I agree with KWorld, some of the larger nations need to be either economically backwards or pared down a little.  Maybe Canada has Oregon and Mexico has California, New Mexico, Nevada.... something like that to limit the economy. 

[Desertfox]

I would be interested in playing a larger Mexico (OTL pre-1840), changes like that could level the playing field.

[snip]

If we want equal nations, I think that that could be managed. I do know that would invalidate the starting fleet compromise I mentioned earlyer. Please do not assume I was accusing anyone of being a "loose cannon". I was outlining a situation that I do not want to occur. So, what does the community want, historic or equal economies or somewhere in between?

[Darman]

Don't worry snip I wasn't thinking I was being accused of being a loose cannon. 

As far as economies go... I was sort of thinking that using historical economies as a base and making them more equal would be the best way.  Redefining certain political borders would help with equalizing the economics in my opinion.  More equal, but not totally equal. 

[snip]

So for example:

The UK never gets India, and therefor cannot afford as large a navy. The in-game effect is less factories.

Is that what you are thinking?

[snip]

I would be interested in playing a larger Mexico (OTL pre-1840), changes like that could level the playing field.

As said before, I really would like to have the major powers filled with players prior to creating new states or beefing up others to levels far beyond OTL norms.