Question regarding budgets

[generalvikus]

Hey guys,

Can anybody tell me what factors go into determining a nation's budget? As I understand it, it's a question of 'national resources' which represents the possible industrial power a nation can turn to naval purposes (e.g. shipbuilding specific factors such a the steel and armaments industries, as opposed to GDP) modified by current tensions, special events, and war. What I want to know is: does the object of tensions play a role in determining the budget modifier - for example, will high tensions with the UK increase one's budget by a greater amount than high tensions with Austria Hungary? 

The reason I'm asking this is that I'm in the middle of my second proper play through, playing as Germany, and finding myself relatively short on funds. The year is 1907, and playing on large fleet size, I have a budget of approximately $150 million while in the middle of my second war with Russia. Tensions with the UK are moderate, and I have an alliance with the United States. It has occurred to me that, if instead of fighting just Russia I was called upon to go toe-to-toe with the historical Dual Alliance, I would be completely outmatched. 

When presented with popups that give options for the budget, tensions and prestige, I have always (possibly with only a very few exceptions) opted for maximum tensions and maximum budget. My only concession to un-German restraint in the realm of foreign policy has been my attempt to maintain at least moderately good relations with the two naval powers stronger than Germany, and this eventually led to an alliance with the USA. 

This would make perfect sense to me if the budget was modelled on the in-game political situation; Germany became the second greatest naval power because it was overtly aiming to challenge Britain. However, it also occurs to me that my alliance with the USA may be affecting the budget much more than I initially assumed, or that there are some other factors at play that I haven't considered. Being a new player, it's always difficult to tell if there's some crucial detail I'm missing out on. If anyone could enlighten me on this topic, I'd very much appreciate it. 

[Deleted]

The reason I'm asking this is that I'm in the middle of my second proper play through, playing as Germany, and finding myself relatively short on funds. The year is 1907, and playing on large fleet size, I have a budget of approximately $150 million while in the middle of my second war with Russia. Tensions with the UK are moderate, and I have an alliance with the United States. It has occurred to me that, if instead of fighting just Russia I was called upon to go toe-to-toe with the historical Dual Alliance, I would be completely outmatched.

If you have moderate tension - I take it is yellow, instead of orange - there is no cause for concern since you're already in war against Russia.
As long as a war is going on, the tension levels stay mostly fixed, with some slight randomization each turn. The turn by turn event pop ups are very scarce compared to peace time, and it's only espionage events. By dropping intel levels to none on other nations, and let it go when others do some spy stuff, the other nations will have no reason to join the war.

Exceptions I can think of:
1. Tension already very high at war start. A little randomization can very well tip it into red. Which you do not have.
2. Unrestricted submarine warfare. I'm sure you've no need for that.
3. Russia/GB alliance. Which you do not have.

So... safe~

[generalvikus]

Aug 27, 2017 4:45:20 GMT -6 skwabie said:

The reason I'm asking this is that I'm in the middle of my second proper play through, playing as Germany, and finding myself relatively short on funds. The year is 1907, and playing on large fleet size, I have a budget of approximately $150 million while in the middle of my second war with Russia. Tensions with the UK are moderate, and I have an alliance with the United States. It has occurred to me that, if instead of fighting just Russia I was called upon to go toe-to-toe with the historical Dual Alliance, I would be completely outmatched.

If you have moderate tension - I take it is yellow, instead of orange - there is no cause for concern since you're already in war against Russia.
As long as a war is going on, the tension levels stay mostly fixed, with some slight randomization each turn. The turn by turn event pop ups are very scarce compared to peace time, and it's only espionage events. By dropping intel levels to none on other nations, and let it go when others do some spy stuff, the other nations will have no reason to join the war.

Exceptions I can think of:
1. Tension already very high at war start. A little randomization can very well tip it into red. Which you do not have.
2. Unrestricted submarine warfare. I'm sure you've no need for that.
3. Russia/GB alliance. Which you do not have.

So... safe~

I wasn't concerned about France actually joining the war, my only point was that my budget, and therefore the Navy, is much weaker relative to other powers than it was at this time in real life, and I want to know if this is directly related to my foreign policy of low tensions with the greater naval powers. 

[JagdFlanker]

this game is only relatively historical at game start - after that it's your performance/choices which will determine your budget

the best way to increase your budget is to win (battles/)wars since you get a big boost that way, even if you don't grab any territories from the enemy at war's end

it's wise to try or hope for a distant or weaker opponent for your first war since that's what's going to set you up for the rest of the game - for example starting as Austria-Hungry i try to avoid going to war with France or Britain in the first decade since it's much harder to pull out a victory against either when they have a larger navy than you do. what you hope for and what you get are 2 different things though lol, but that's what makes the game so replayable

[Deleted]

Aug 27, 2017 5:45:42 GMT -6 generalvikus said:

I wasn't concerned about France actually joining the war, my only point was that my budget, and therefore the Navy, is much weaker relative to other powers than it was at this time in real life, and I want to know if this is directly related to my foreign policy of low tensions with the greater naval powers.

The way the game works, your nation has a base economy, "base resources" + "resources from possessions", which you can check in the Almanac.

Then there's the "budget modifier". How much of your national economy is transferred to the naval budget.

During war time, the modifier value tends to stay above 22. If it is below, the government will vote to give you more budget (budget modifier +) as long as you can keep cash reserve in the green for a few turns. If it is above, it will remain at that value. There is very little way the player can influence the budget.

During peace time, the modifier value is, ofc, changed depending on the event answers. However there is a sweep spot, budget modifier being at 12-14. Or, your monthly budget roughly equaling your base resource. Lower than this and you are indeed weakening the navy. Higher than this level and unrest will start to climb.

So when an event happens that lemme choose whether I want higher budget or lower tensions, I check the Almanac, what is my base resource, what is my monthly budget, what're tension levels plus what is my current strategic objective and make a balanced decision.

Tensions with the great naval powers sometime do prompt events like "battleship scare!" and give you a budget modifier bump as an emergency measure. But these are only temporary - you will likely go to war which bumps your budget to war level, or you will gradually improve relations and the budget will be voted down, or you remain at this situation for a long time which will spike the unrest until the government collapses lol.

If ya wanna know more about how the budget and economy in RTW works, search for a couple of posts by ddg who made the initial discovery and has a rather comprehensive description iirc. - I do think it is somewhat complex, but very interesting stuff. I did not know these when firstly started.

[Airy W]

Aug 27, 2017 5:45:42 GMT -6 generalvikus said:

my only point was that my budget, and therefore the Navy, is much weaker relative to other powers than it was at this time in real life, and I want to know if this is directly related to my foreign policy of low tensions with the greater naval powers. 

Historically, Germany financed it's navy with debt before both WWI and WWII. They were essentially spending at wartime levels even when at peace. Meanwhile the US was spending a smaller share of it's resources on the military then other great powers. This allowed Germany to briefly outspend the US but it wasn't sustainable. So if you want to recreate the historical German budget, you need to constantly drive the budget above a sustainable level. You don't have any control over whether the Americans spend at their historically low level. You do get a massive freebie however, historically German fast economic growth wouldn't have continued past the early 1910s (even without WWI, this is why they started WWI) but in game it just keeps going forever. So you dont need to worry about the Russian economy growing massive and inevitably knocking you down to 4th place. And the Italians and Japanese will stay anemic as well when historically they expanded capacity.

[oldpop2000]

Just some information gleaned from different period pieces and documents. The difference prior to WW1 was that the British before the war, instituted an income tax. However, to my knowledge while there was a strong debate on the subject, neither Germany, France or Russia implemented that same tax. The financial constraints on the Germany caused the economic issues prior to the war due to this failure. All nations were aware of the relationship between financial wherewithal and military strength.  The gold standard was another issue. Gold reserves were required to print more money as we all know. All nations including France, Germany and Russia increased their gold reserves to be able to print more money if war did come. The British never did.

I believe that the nations in question, shortened to FBGR, felt the next war was going to be a short war and made no plans for a long war. There is much to this subject including how the major banks like the Bank of England, Germany, France were owned and operated. They were private, not owned by the State.

This is a complex subject and the game simplifies it, thank heaven. But long wars in the game do have an effect as we have all seen. Good subject.

[bcoopactual]

I don't know if this will be helpful or not but one of the choices at game start will also have a significant effect on your country's budget and that is whether you choose to start with historical resources or not. It's the check box right below fleet size when you are starting a new game.

Choosing historical resources affects every country's resources except Great Britain. Historical resources changes Germany's base from 18 resources to 8, A-H 10 to 5, France 16 to 8, Italy 14 to 5, Russia 16 to 8, Japan 10 to 5 and the US 16 to 13. The British base resource stays at 20.

As you can see, choosing historical resources affects Germany and Italy more than the rest because their base numbers drop more than 50%.

Not choosing historical resources makes the game a bit more balanced and makes most nations more competitive with each other as well as Britain.

[oldpop2000]

Aug 28, 2017 16:45:06 GMT -6 bcoopactual said:

I don't know if this will be helpful or not but one of the choices at game start will also have a significant effect on your country's budget and that is whether you choose to start with historical resources or not. It's the check box right below fleet size when you are starting a new game.

Choosing historical resources affects every country's resources except Great Britain. Historical resources changes Germany's base from 18 resources to 8, A-H 10 to 5, France 16 to 8, Italy 14 to 5, Russia 16 to 8, Japan 10 to 5 and the US 16 to 13. The British base resource stays at 20.

As you can see, choosing historical resources affects Germany and Italy more than the rest because their base numbers drop more than 50%.

Not choosing historical resources makes the game a bit more balanced and makes most nations more competitive with each other as well as Britain.

This is a good suggestion because some don't understand the economic and financial factors affecting the nations around the turn of the century. I never use historical resources, because as you say, it does make it more balanced unless you just want to lose most of the time. I know that if I use historical resources for the Japanese, forget it. I will be toast.

I have two short documents about pre-war finances and economics for Europe. I hope you find them informative.

1914-1918-Online-economic_planning_before_1....pdf (110.14 KB)

ww1overview2005.pdf (138.22 KB)

[ddg]

Note that the "historical resources" setting only affects base or national resources and not colonial possessions. Additionally, the budget preview at game start only displays base or national resources. This means nations with large empires are less hampered by the historical setting than might initially appear. Austria-Hungary and Japan show the same resources, but for this reason Japan will start with the stronger economy in both scenarios.

[generalvikus]

I have always used historical resources and I expect I always will.