Roll Call

[Walter]

Norse are in deep doo-doo- long borders, split land base, small population, half nation icelocked in winter.

Yes, not to mention that stupid wall in Britain put there by Publius Aelius Hadrianus Augustus. :)

Still while the borders are long, those of the Green area are much, much longer.

I like this scenario. But as Kaiser Kirk said, it will be difficult to create some details for each nation.... The easiest way is to leave the historical real cities, techs, nations, traditions and habits. And just to unite the territory with all of this into one state...

If you have ideas for details for your nation you can apply them, if you haven't you can easily apply the stuff from the nations that fall into the given region and maybe 'borrow' a few things from the nations around. Put those things together might result in an interesting mix of traditions, religions and habits. While I will make up various stuff for my region (which does not include something like the Pickelhaube with horns on the side for my soldiers), there will be existing stuff as well as that is probably a good base to have.

[olekit24]

I'll take Iberia )

[Jefgte]

I'll take Iberia )

Excellent Neighbor

;)

[snip]

I'll take Iberia )

Excellent Neighbor

;)

Do remember we are picking and Red is going to be me because its the most geographically isolated. Am I to take this to mean you want Purple?

[Darman]

hi

[snip]

hi

Well now you have done it. :P

[Darman]

Sure, I check in every week until a little after New Years and nothing happens.  I skip a week and look what I missed
(i didn't look.  i read the first page and then just posted)

[snip]

On another note, Walter and I have been talking each other senseless over the rules. I think we are getting close to something we can toss at you all to break horribly test out.

[Darman]

scary thought, that

[Darman]

I dont mind the spreadsheets, I just have trouble altering the formulas because I'm not used to using the reference boxes like we have now.  I also don't usually mind filling out the spreadsheets. 

[Darman]

Also I'll take either Germans or Byzantines. 

[Kaiser Kirk]

Some replies.

Concerned Europe small theater. (Other map concerns)

So if expansion over historic borders is out, then Naval might and control of the SLOC is what matters, which puts those nations closer to colonies on the SLOC in a better spot.
Plus, the entire army thing and worrying about land battles and strategic aspects was one the things that attracted me to Navalism.

Baseline : I think the kicker is enough production to make a small 1940ish navy of 1 BATDIV a Carrier or two, a couple cruiser squadrons, adequate dds, a couple fleet elements, etc. over time should be a PC minimum. I'm ok with loosely, but the range shouldn't be more than 2-3x from big to little.

Um, I thought my job was to throw rocks, not be helpful, but ok, I'm willing to mix it up...

Basic concept is - every PC should be able to make a range of types in sufficient quantities to be a factor.
That means by 1940, fielding 4 x Treaty BBs, 1 x CV, 1xCVL, 4x CA as 4 main squadrons. Each would have a screen of 4 CLs, and a squadron (DESRON) of 8DDs. Toss in a dozen subs and you have the major combatents. You'll need 6 tenders for the Destroyers and Subs, Ammo stores for the CVs, probably 5 oilers for the squadrons. If it's an all overseas game, then say 4 transports , 4 cargo and a DD squadron + tender for escort. Figure teh support ships at 16,000 each, cost 4bp.

Call that BB: 140k, CV:20k, CVL: 15k, CA : 48k, CL:106k, DD: 60k, SS:15k, Tenders : 6x16:96/4= 24k, AOE : 8k, Oilers: 20k, TT: 16, Cargo : 16

Total : 488k tons over 20 years, aka 40 turns = 12.2 BP / Turn.

Either 12 or 13BP works,   it's enough to field a decent force- close to what Italy had in WWII. If you rebuild and refit older vessels you can boost your navy further, but it's not as avant garde. If you skimp on CL and CAss you can have more BBs...or SS...
Depending on if you have mechanisms for BP growth or not will indicate if PCs need to start there, or can just be expected to grow to that point by 1940 (which is the era the tonnages are from).

I agree the fixed progression stuff is not ideal, but it's the "least bad" solution in terms of relying on GM workload to handle progression. Doing the random advance thing plays right into the same problem we have with tech rolls. It's impossible to fairly provide that information in advance, necessitating everyone being caught up before moving on to the next turn. That's proven to be impractical, and I would rather do away with it.

Part of the specific issue you site can also be handled by starting shortly past the point where that major revolution occurs, which is the current plan.

That makes me sad, I was hoping we'd be moving further back in time than forward. I like the predreds and the coal burning.
As for for making rolls. That can fairly quickly done well in advance. heck I'll volunteer to sit down with my percentile dice and roll for each tech to see when it "Really" pops up if that helps.
Oh darn, there I go trying to be helpful <looks for a rock>

The current thing we are playing with here allows for as much military definition as a player wants without punishing those who want to leave non-naval stuff more abstract. It's an admittedly radical departure from the current system, but I feel its the best call to make from a design standpoint.

That just sounds like Wesworld. Frankly it was undefined army nonsense that broke my tolerance and led to my leaving.  Not in favor.

Wouldn't mind some of Kwold's old suggestions on fixing growth rate to tax rate.

Can you provide a link to exactly what you are thinking?

Well I did some looking around in the Archives and ...no.
He had some proposal where the IC would expand by some fixed rate like 4%, and you could raise or lower your taxes $ and that would change the growth rate. So if you needed more money to mobilize your army, or build high $ /low BP items, you could raise your taxes, but your growth would go down. Say +10% taxes = -1% growth, -10% taxes +1% growth, with taxes being at like 30%.

Oh, on warfare, I've for a while had that thought that BP is probably a 2-shift industry in peacetime. In wartime you should be able to add a 3rd shift, but you'd still need pauses for maintenance, so instead of boosting production by 50% it would only be 40%, and cost $0.8 per 400tons.

However since you seem to be 'simplification' mode, I doubt you'll be interested.

Overall :
First, thanks to Snip and Walter stepping forward to take this on for all of our benefit.
Second, I will say at this point that I view the course taken with some concern.
I'm an "engineer type" who's fine with rule complexity, I mean this is so simple compared to the rules I deal with at work. But I understand that I am wierd in that way.
Still, discouragement of European war, the abandonment of land militaries, starting IN the dreadnaught era, the abandoment of tech randomness, these are big things I'm really not keen on, and some of them directly relate to things I disliked in Wesworld and looked forward to here. I mean both as Bavaria and as Italy, I had land wars.
I was planning on taking on the Ottomans about 1909/10, was going to try to help Greece grab Crete, while I grabbed a chunk of North Africa and the Dalmatian Coast. The two Italian Jungle Divisions could contest the Great Lakes Area. With my West African Ports, the supply line to my Colonies would be open, and I could raid Ottoman commerce on the Horn of Africa.  The war would likely see Germany help the Ottomans, that would likely cement a split with Germany and align me closer to France.  Alliances with Spain or the UK could also come into play, all regarding the War in Europe dynamic. 
I hope everything is going well for Rocky, miss his presence :(.

[snip]

Right back at you.

First, thanks to Snip and Walter stepping forward to take this on for all of our benefit.

You are most welcome.

So if expansion over historic borders is out, then Naval might and control of the SLOC is what matters, which puts those nations closer to colonies on the SLOC in a better spot.

It's not that expansion over borders is out, it's something we want to discurage from being the norm. It's still going to be possible to do, but it's not going to pay off economically as well as colonies.

Regarding SLOC, we have been taking pains with the map to ensure that everyone either A) Controls a route to open ocean outright or B) Does not have the route to open ocean controlled by one other power. It seems at this point that Red is the worst off in this regard, hence why I stepped in to take it. Green might need a little more help in this regard, but I think the rest of the nations meet those criteria no problem.

Tonnage Stuff

Good figures to have, thanks for putting it out there.

That makes me sad, I was hoping we'd be moving further back in time than forward. I like the predreds and the coal burning.

The issue there is that people know the sort of improvements that are coming. No matter how oppressive the governing limitations are (tech, hard rules, etc), the push for Dreads is going to happen as fast as it can (in my experience with a couple of these early restart attempts). I would rather start past that point so we can work through the development of such in the pre-game period and have it done in a consistent and logical manor rather than mad rush.

As for for making rolls. That can fairly quickly done well in advance. heck I'll volunteer to sit down with my percentile dice and roll for each tech to see when it "Really" pops up if that helps.

The issue is not physically doing the rolls but providing that information at the same time across the playerbase. We are playing with a system that still keeps it variable, but shifts that control to the players. I like where its going, but we want to put it in your guy's hands to break the crap out of it playtest it before we carve it in stone.

That just sounds like Wesworld. Frankly it was undefined army nonsense that broke my tolerance and led to my leaving.  Not in favor.

I've sent you some additional details via PM on this but wanted to address one point here. I'm definitely not advocating leaving non-naval stuff in an uncontrolled state like Wesworld has. There is going to be a way of tracking non-naval stuff, it's just different than the current system.

Well I did some looking around in the Archives and ...no.
He had some proposal where the IC would expand by some fixed rate like 4%, and you could raise or lower your taxes $ and that would change the growth rate. So if you needed more money to mobilize your army, or build high $ /low BP items, you could raise your taxes, but your growth would go down. Say +10% taxes = -1% growth, -10% taxes +1% growth, with taxes being at like 30%.

I see where that system is coming from, but I think its best to keep the relationship between the items that generate the resources we use and the resources themselves consistent across the board.

Oh, on warfare, I've for a while had that thought that BP is probably a 2-shift industry in peacetime. In wartime you should be able to add a 3rd shift, but you'd still need pauses for maintenance, so instead of boosting production by 50% it would only be 40%, and cost $0.8 per 400tons.

However since you seem to be 'simplification' mode, I doubt you'll be interested.

We have not really looked at Peacetime/Wartime rules yet *adds to list*. I will say I've found the force Civil/Military split very frustrating from a game-balance perspective, so its not likely to make a return. I see what this system you propose is trying to do, and I'm oddly intrigued by it.

Second, I will say at this point that I view the course taken with some concern.
I'm an "engineer type" who's fine with rule complexity, I mean this is so simple compared to the rules I deal with at work. But I understand that I am wierd in that way.
Still, discouragement of European war, the abandonment of land militaries, starting IN the dreadnaught era, the abandoment of tech randomness, these are big things I'm really not keen on, and some of them directly relate to things I disliked in Wesworld and looked forward to here. I mean both as Bavaria and as Italy, I had land wars.

I understand the apprehensiveness here. Navalism evolved from Wesworld to be more nation-sim-with-SpringSharp-attached. However, at its core, it was always about using Springsharp in a setting that allowed for the creation of a fleet to fulfill a set of requirements not determined by traditional geography. Additionally, the requirements were not shaped by following some historic line, but by other players. It's a uniqueness that various threads about building navies for fictional countries dropped into the real world at some point in time can never match. For all of its faults, Wesworld has one thing we have not had here. Longevity. Now I'm sure there are some pent-up feelings here, I know there is on my end. For all its faults, problems, and craziness Wesworld has kept on chugging along. I personally feel a lot of that is to do with the relitive simplicity of the rules and reports. This makes is comparatively easy for a new player to come in, pick up a nation, and get right into the thick of the "action". I think we can work out a system here that accomplishes both a collapse back toward the naval-roots of this game without also compromising the areas where what we have is a strict improvement (IMO of course) over Wesworld. I'm ok with meaningful complexity *cough*refitrules*cough*, and we have expanded a few things complexity wise where it makes sense to do so. Walter and I are still doing a lot of editing and beating each other over the head about achieving both those goals, so I don't want to put a product out into your guy's hands that we might go and rip up 15 min after posting. I'm not looking to just hand these down from on-high one day and say "take it or leave it". I want feedback so we can make this something we all enjoy doing. 

[Kaiser Kirk]

For all of its faults, Wesworld has one thing we have not had here. Longevity. Now I'm sure there are some pent-up feelings here, I know there is on my end. For all its faults, problems, and craziness Wesworld has kept on chugging along.

You may have a correct observation. My point of view is any activity that leads to a prolonged pause by players while they wait...and wait... sheds players like mad. It also seems like rule changes during the sim that effect the current plans of players is disruptive. This past summer we had both.  As I recall, Wesworld ground to a halt during the South American war as well, then staggered on.  I PM'd you my idea of how to make wars run a little bit more on time to avoid that.

Edit : Once rule simplification I'd advocate is changing drydocks to be a flat fee + $0.N per X volume.   That way folks can make dry docks suitable for their L:B:D requirements and not be stuck with a set length.  Presumably a T6 at 320m long is ~40m wide, and 10m deep, so 128k m3 .  Say $3 (machinery shops, cranes, workforce) + $0.25 per 1,000 cy would cost $35 for the equivalent, while a T0 70 x 10 x 4.3 is  $3.75  - roughly the same as currently.
However, one could make docks at 150m x 30m, or 230 x 23  or whatever combo one wished to fit one's ships.  Often I find I want 190 or 200, not 170, or 90 not 70 or 120.

[Darman]

Btw is there any way to get a Victoria II map that is easily editable for the whole world?  Or one with names of the small territories/provinces attached?