Have enough issues cropped up with Pre-Start stuff to where we want to redo it?

[snip]

Question in the topic, please discuss. I can go either way on this.

Pros
--Lots of little things (eg Jef's re-gunning, Deployment points) that have piled up can be fixed.
--Some interesting adjustments could be made (eg Kirk's pre-start colony proposal) and integrated smoothly.
--Can tackle it in a way that is perhaps better than blind development.
--Can pull everyone back in an engagement.

Cons
--More time until we "officially" start
--More time until what we do starts to matter, which can hurt engagement.

[The Rock Doctor]

I'm fine, but had the benefit of going last, after some of the kinks had been worked out.  While I had the opportunity to look at y'all's ship designs, I was not designing hard against any specific classes and I don't think my set-up is wildly thrown off by modest changes to other nations.

I wouldn't object to the pre-start colony thing, but it's easy enough to just start in 1910.

Since we're not supposed to be focused on player-vs-player, I'm not going to get too anxious over modest re-dos.  I'd suggest each of us identify specifically what they'd do over if they could do over, and then we can see if any of those would cause major ripples.

[Jefgte]

Basicaly, Byzantime ship had a refit, refurbishement or rebuilt after 10yo
Global life of a ship:
LD 1892
com 1895
10yo refit, refurbishement or rebuilt 1905
secondary ship 1915
reserve 1920
scrap 1925

All ships built for our Navies in the 1890' had 10/12 yo refit or refurbishement (?)

Before the start of the game => Could we update armament ? Y/N

[snip]

The issue at play here Jef is not "Can we do refits?" (Yes), its "Can the specific refit item be done the way its been paid for?". Im not sold on the idea at this time.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Question in the topic, please discuss. I can go either way on this.

Pros
--Lots of little things (eg Jef's re-gunning, Deployment points) that have piled up can be fixed.
--Some interesting adjustments could be made (eg Kirk's pre-start colony proposal) and integrated smoothly.
--Can tackle it in a way that is perhaps better than blind development.
--Can pull everyone back in an engagement.

Cons
--More time until we "officially" start
--More time until what we do starts to matter, which can hurt engagement.

Overall , I do not think enough things have popped up that we want to redo the prebuild.
I think the Cons are correct, and that pushing the start date out 2-3months will hurt engagement

Pros :
-engagement : I think engagement will increase when there is a set start date (say May 15), with a 1/turn month "schedule", so folks know to come look and there will be things to see.

-'other than blind development' - while there is some attraction to these, we've already expended considerable effort to get to where we are.

-Colony rule : actually I didn't go ahead with this because I didn't want to disrupt and delay anything.   The idea is simple - declare each nation has one important colony already established.
I would advocate for up to 5 provinces, with 3 IC and 2 Land "free", and 1 dock can be sited there.
Probably demand it be X sea spaces away from nearest port. 
This generates $4.5 bonus income- making it valuable, and giving the player reason to be concerned about that area.  It also gets the Norse & Sweden past the Denmark Strait/Channel, and Byzantine past the Gates of Hercales/Red Sea.

- Regunning is a "what is meant by this rule".  My expectation is things like that will come up over and over regardless of how long we delay.
In this particular case, I thought it was a question asked and answered somewhere in the rule development process. Certainly where I've looked at trying to update my older ships, I've tried to keep the roller path weight the same.
...but my memory could be flawed...or frankly this is N7, the memory could belong to an earlier iteration.
So, I advised it be punted up to "He who wrote it".

-Deployment points - a wonderful example of things popping up.  Now, In hindsight, it seems clear. However, Walter and myself managed to misread it.
Since deployment costs 1:1 to land, there is no reason folks couldn't go back and reallocate what they bought between those, so long as the # of offensive (deployment) points are not increased.
Now, during rule development, since I understood this issue wrong, I didn't protest the cost. However, a parallel discussion on the proper cost of support could be hand while the game starts, and a later reallocation occur - again, not increasing offensive capability.

[The Rock Doctor]

I'd like us to reach a conclusion and move forward soon, however it may be.

[snip]

Do we want to say wraped on Pre-start by the 20th?

[The Rock Doctor]

Sure, but realistically, I'm ready to go now.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I can do the 20th.
I will convert my draft efforts to final.
I will also get Snip that bloodthirsty warmong peaceful uplifting bringing of civilization and flush toilets map and timeline

[Jefgte]

Move forward...

Jef follow   ;)




"Scharnhorst immer vorne"

[The Rock Doctor]

...soon.

[Jefgte]

I'll came back from south of France sunday 20th.
Then, I work seriously & go ahead next week. Final adjustments & ...    :)

Jef  ;)

[Kaiser Kirk]

So it sounds like the 27th is a good date to start on ?

Unresolved issues :   If these are not resolved by the 27th, we should just consider them abandoned.

Kirk's Colony idea
My current version of the idea was up to 5 <could be more/less> contiguous provinces (or separated by a strait), with 3 IC and 2 Land points.
The 3 "developed" spots don't need troops, but the 2 undeveloped do need garrisons.

From the Nation's resources further Land points and/or 1 dock or slip allowed to be placed there. 

Jefgte's "Extra" Deployment Points :
While I have found that the Byzantine ACRs are bigger, badder and faster than my ACRs ...  I still don't think changing the SS is a good idea, as it would lead to hindsight-inspired "one upmanship".

Counterproposal.
In my prebuild, in order to spread hulls and tonnage around, I found I did not use all the BPs my nation was producing in 1908-1909.
Overall, except for 1900, 1904 and 1906, in each year my nation would have produced more BP than I spent, by a total of 232BP.

In 1908-1909 alone,  I used 70.7 of 112 !
So there's some slack there.

What we could do is designate say 10 BP, or even 20BP <up for debate> of FY1908 alterations which can be put towards naval refit/refurbishments/reconstructions, OR for additional land points, OR additional support points.

I've already paid for minor ones, Jefgte for some major ones.

That would allow some older units to be "upgraded" prior to game start and help address his concerns.
Also give folks something to fiddle with until start :)

[The Rock Doctor]

I'm fine with the colony thing, and fine if we don't have it.

I'm not keen on the BP re-jigging, but can live with it.

We need to stop fiddling and start playing.

[snip]

Agreed, those options are all going to add time which would be better spent on getting going. Im going to say no changes.