N4 Economic Outline (Not Finished)

[P3D]

I am working on it.

[Sachmle]

And we appreciate it.

[snip]

That we do, very much so.

[PyscoWard]

*YOu Know you people are having an adverse effect on my blood pressure*

Brazil and Argentina are examples of nations who have cash but have not invested it in building and paying maintenance on Military Slipways and Drydocks and Ports.

There fore under the proposed system they would approach a nation who did have such things possibly not being utilized for a period of time and pay them some money to build such items for them.

I do not see where this Complexity issue is comming from.   You already have to keep track of the maintenance costs of all sorts of things now instead of tracking how much BP you have to spend as well that is simply removed from your work load and another maintenance cost has been added.   This cost was not added to force you to buy ships on the foreign market as all the Player nations should be big enough to build ships on their own.    Its there as a limiting factor on ship construction. 

Oh I have $180 for my Military Budget for the next 4 years so let me see I will build 20 Battle Ships that fit into my 20 Type 2 Docks or Slips.   Before you built Slips and Dry Docks and then they sat empty for months or years at a time.   To be honest Italy is one of those who had more Dry Dock and Slips then it could ever use unless I was building just 500 Ton DD or was able to purchase lots of foreign [BP] for use.

I have looked at the system and I dont see any additional complexity.

Will we need to have ship yards to refit ships and how often will they need to be refited .
I'm hopeing to play Siam as my nation .

Another question  is can a minor nation buy a ship with better tech then what they have ?

[P3D]

Will we need to have ship yards to refit ships and how often will they need to be refited .
I'm hopeing to play Siam as my nation .

Another question  is can a minor nation buy a ship with better tech then what they have ?

You will need drydocks to refit ships, 10 years after commissioning, and maybe again in 10 years. That part of the rules won't change drastically.

Unfortunately Siam will not be available as a player nation - it is just at a wrong place.
Send your four starting location choices to the mods. If you really want a smallish nation, that can be accommodated, too.

[TexanCowboy]

I actually disagree with that. Historically, ships went in for refits, if they did at all, 15+ years after they were laid down, and that's also the system that Wesworld uses. There is no need to accelerate that to 10 years, unless you're trying to limit shipbuilding even moreso than it is already. 15 years should be fine and remember, in the pre-dread era, refits were scarce, if existant at all.

[P3D]

I actually disagree with that. Historically, ships went in for refits, if they did at all, 15+ years after they were laid down, and that's also the system that Wesworld uses. There is no need to accelerate that to 10 years, unless you're trying to limit shipbuilding even moreso than it is already. 15 years should be fine and remember, in the pre-dread era, refits were scarce, if existant at all. >:(

The 10-year is counted from commissioning, not laying down or launching, so the difference is not that much. It also forces the players to have enough drydocks for this reason.
However, as maintenance costs are increased from a the token amount in Wesworld/N3verse, you could argue that overhauls should not need to be specified.

[Nobody]

Many ships go into a drydock every year. So a major overhaul every 10 years seems reasonable to me.

[Sachmle]

Ships get 'overhauled' almost every time they return to base from a long deployment IRL. Hull scraping/painting, minor repairs, boiler cleaning, etc. We cover that with our 'upkeep', but they still require time in a drydock IRL, here we ignore that. Therefore, requiring a 10 major refit/overhaul seems pretty reasonable to me. In war it's even worse. Ships left theater often to return for refit and resupply. Our rules a very generous on this and I'm not complaining about it. The other alternative is to require ships that have been out on long deployments to spend a week or 2 in drydock every 6-8mo.

[P3D]

Naval expenditures would be split roughly as 60-70% maintenance, 25-30% ship construction, and 5-10% infrastructure projects. So there won't be need to send every ship individually into drydock.

There would be a drydock requirement for naval bases. You'd need a drydock for the largest ship based, plus one extra "large enough" drydock for every 20 ships. That's only for periodic maintenance. To reduce beancounting, drydocks for small ships (<90m and <2000t) would not be accounted.

[Nobody]

Naval expenditures would be split roughly as 60-70% maintenance, 25-30% ship construction, and 5-10% infrastructure projects. So there won't be need to send every ship individually into drydock.

There would be a drydock requirement for naval bases. You'd need a drydock for the largest ship based, plus one extra "large enough" drydock for every 20 ships. That's only for periodic maintenance. To reduce beancounting, drydocks for small ships (<90m and <2000t) would not be accounted.

If these 25% for new ships are enough to replace all ships every 15 to 20 years with a new (now bigger) one I see no problems, although I'm not entirely sure whether this is less bean counting.

[ctwaterman]

I think of it this way...

Currently in N3 I have to keep track of my Ships and every 10 years I have to schedule a Refit for ships 10+ Years old or they suffer reliability issues.

That means every year or so 2 or more Dry Docks are busy doing nothing but doing refit on ships.   But lets be honest as we move from 1880 to 1890 and start building PDN we wont be refitting the older 1880 level ships naval tech advanced quickly enough in this time period that most ships build by say 1885 were nearly useless against a ship built in say 1895 and definetly against most of the 1905 ships.

[Korpen]

Just one little idea to reduce RISK-like behaviour, not certain in which thread to put it, but here seems as good as any place.
A country's income is reduced by the same percentage as the new territory increases it, but the penalty is reduced by 1%-unit per year. So if a country after a war gains new territory increasing its economy by 20% it would have a reduction to its economy for the next 20 years. The exact numbers are a bit arbitrary, and could be subject to individual changes.
Also, no income from territories unless they have been legitimized; that is officially ceded in a peace treaty by another country, so pure occupation is just financial drain.

The point really is to discourage war for total conquest, and be more in line with the typical 19th century wars which usually had fairly limited objectives. Also, if conquest do not pay (or loosing might hurt that much) players will perhaps be more keen to seek a negotiated peace after a few decisive battles, rather then to keep fighting to the bitter end.

[miketr]

Just one little idea to reduce RISK-like behaviour, not certain in which thread to put it, but here seems as good as any place.
A country's income is reduced by the same percentage as the new territory increases it, but the penalty is reduced by 1%-unit per year. So if a country after a war gains new territory increasing its economy by 20% it would have a reduction to its economy for the next 20 years. The exact numbers are a bit arbitrary, and could be subject to individual changes.
Also, no income from territories unless they have been legitimized; that is officially ceded in a peace treaty by another country, so pure occupation is just financial drain.

The point really is to discourage war for total conquest, and be more in line with the typical 19th century wars which usually had fairly limited objectives. Also, if conquest do not pay (or loosing might hurt that much) players will perhaps be more keen to seek a negotiated peace after a few decisive battles, rather then to keep fighting to the bitter end.

I don't think this is necessary.  Did N3 have any fights to the death?

I agree that the model we want is that of the Cabinet War, IE wars of limited objectives and limited means.

Michael

[snip]

Did N3 have any fights to the death?

Chinese Civil War could be rated as that. But, it is the outlier and in a unique scenario that seems unlikely to repeat itself based on how N4 looks to be shaping up.