|
Post by fredsanford on Mar 6, 2018 23:04:37 GMT -6
Why not? Surely you don't think government budgets are purely rational documents? Having political "juice" certainly matters IMO.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 6, 2018 23:10:05 GMT -6
Why not? Surely you don't think government budgets are purely rational documents? Having political "juice" certainly matters IMO. No, I certainly don't considering that I worked for the US Navy for 34 years, my Dad for 27, and my grandfather and mother. So, trust I know exactly how the game works. There is a lot of politics involved in the fight for budgets but is prestige really the deciding factor? It isn't, believe me. It's the service that presents the best geostrategic rationale for its budget requirements and for a Maritime power like the US, it gives the Navy an advantage. However, does it really give the Italian Navy that much of an advantage? Very possibly considering its geography. However, geography also plays a part in its industrial and economic strength. That is the key to this whole game. All that aside, I will continue to use your advice on how to interpret the games budgets and I hope you will continue to pass along information to assist me in understanding the games basics, to make my analysis of results accurate. Again, I play the game for realistic results, not for any other reason.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Mar 6, 2018 23:21:20 GMT -6
I didn't say it was "the deciding factor". I said it was A factor. It's a marginal effect, an extra % or two.
Even the statement "It's the service that presents the best geostrategic rationale for its budget requirements" isn't necessarily true IMO. Look at the late '40s- early 50s: the USAF convinced the Truman administration that nuclear bombers were the only thing that mattered, the USS United States got cancelled, and the revolt of the admirals took place. Then people realized the *maybe* nuclear weapons weren't all that usable for all crises. In the long run, you may be correct, but there's a lot of "noise" to overcome.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 7, 2018 0:07:35 GMT -6
I didn't say it was "the deciding factor". I said it was A factor. It's a marginal effect, an extra % or two. Even the statement "It's the service that presents the best geostrategic rationale for its budget requirements" isn't necessarily true IMO. Look at the late '40s- early 50s: the USAF convinced the Truman administration that nuclear bombers were the only thing that mattered, the USS United States got cancelled, and the revolt of the admirals took place. Then people realized the *maybe* nuclear weapons weren't all that usable for all crises. In the long run, you may be correct, but there's a lot of "noise" to overcome. The problem with the USS United States cancelling was that the US Navy had not figured out how to carry nuclear weapons on its birds. This gave the USAF an advantage. It was the service who could make the best geostrategic case for that particular fiscal year, that won the temporary fight. The Navy had a substantial budget after World War II and the people, i.e the Congress and president, wanted to return to the pre-war budgets. Unfortunately, the Korean War changed the viewpoint radically and the rest is history. But believe me, it was the service who could make the best geostrategic case in 1949 budget, which by the way started on October 1st, 1948, that won the day. However, within one year, the whole game changed. The Korean War was a game changer for the USAF nuclear deterrent advocated by General Curtis Lemay of SAC. The limited war in Korea proved that nuclear weapons were not the answer but naval support using gunfire and aircraft was better. The B-29's just were not that effective in such a limited war. So, in the end, geostrategic considerations and budgets won the day over time. But this is off subject, so it's is back to the game. Great stuff though.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 15, 2018 13:15:14 GMT -6
I don't play the US or Great Britain, mainly because they take so much time. But I want to start branching out. I don't play for prestige, and I don't seek fleet engagements. I use trade warfare a lot. So, what is the advice of those of you who play the US more.
BTW, just finished another game as Japan. Two wars against the French and won both sinking one of their battleships and a minesweeper so it was fun. Prestige was better than most of my games.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Apr 15, 2018 14:31:20 GMT -6
I don't play the US or Great Britain, mainly because they take so much time. But I want to start branching out. I don't play for prestige, and I don't seek fleet engagements. I use trade warfare a lot. So, what is the advice of those of you who play the US more. BTW, just finished another game as Japan. Two wars against the French and won both sinking one of their battleships and a minesweeper so it was fun. Prestige was better than most of my games. If you do not like war to much, have a lot cheap short range battleships with small numbers of high quality battlecruisers. And either a lot of submarines or raiders with long range, may be extreme range for European sea zone. It will be fight of psychology as large fights would be not so often. Just an idea.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 15, 2018 15:51:57 GMT -6
I don't play the US or Great Britain, mainly because they take so much time. But I want to start branching out. I don't play for prestige, and I don't seek fleet engagements. I use trade warfare a lot. So, what is the advice of those of you who play the US more. BTW, just finished another game as Japan. Two wars against the French and won both sinking one of their battleships and a minesweeper so it was fun. Prestige was better than most of my games. If you do not like war to much, have a lot cheap short range battleships with small numbers of high quality battlecruisers. And either a lot of submarines or raiders with long range, may be extreme range for European sea zone. It will be fight of psychology as large fights would be not so often. Just an idea. Thank you for your advice. I have started my game as the US. It is September 1907. There is a Naval Limitation Treaty limiting ships to 10,000 tons. I have 8 Armored cruisers, 4 heavy cruisers, 7 light cruisers, 31 destroyers, 12 Minesweepers and 20 coastal submarines. I am rebuilding four of my armored cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Apr 15, 2018 16:01:37 GMT -6
If you do not like war to much, have a lot cheap short range battleships with small numbers of high quality battlecruisers. And either a lot of submarines or raiders with long range, may be extreme range for European sea zone. It will be fight of psychology as large fights would be not so often. Just an idea. Thank you for your advice. I have started my game as the US. It is September 1907. There is a Naval Limitation Treaty limiting ships to 10,000 tons. I have 8 Armored cruisers, 4 heavy cruisers, 7 light cruisers, 31 destroyers, 12 Minesweepers and 20 coastal submarines. I am rebuilding four of my armored cruisers. Is it possible to increase chance of any Limitation Treaty? I have not played it for long time and but I am interested in as it usually give interesting design out of ordinary. However I try to choose disarment conference but without any success.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 15, 2018 17:19:22 GMT -6
Thank you for your advice. I have started my game as the US. It is September 1907. There is a Naval Limitation Treaty limiting ships to 10,000 tons. I have 8 Armored cruisers, 4 heavy cruisers, 7 light cruisers, 31 destroyers, 12 Minesweepers and 20 coastal submarines. I am rebuilding four of my armored cruisers. Is it possible to increase chance of any Limitation Treaty? I have not played it for long time and but I am interested in as it usually give interesting design out of ordinary. However I try to choose disarment conference but without any success. Interesting question but I don't know the answer. I go for disarmament conferences all the time. Currently in my game, Circa 1911, I have 20 submarines with 20 more being built. I have a ways to go with light cruisers and heavy cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 15, 2018 19:47:30 GMT -6
My first full game as the US is complete. I had one war, against France and won that handily. My economy was the highest, my fleet tonnage was third highest and there was little tension in the world at the end. Highly successful, my strategy that I use for the smaller nations was entirely successful. Just a note: my final tally of submarines in service was 47, only Italy built more. I had 10 heavy cruisers, 13 light cruisers, 41 destroyers, 15 armored cruisers and two battleships. My monthly balance at the end was 11,535,526 dollars.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 21, 2018 16:25:42 GMT -6
I am starting a new game as Japan but with historical resources. This is in concert with my thread about Japanese attempts at self-sufficiency after the 1905 Russo-Japanese War. The thread is in the Military History forum but started out about Pearl Harbor. Hopefully I can find some real answers. Here is the initial list of ships with historical resources and a medium fleet.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 21, 2018 17:07:49 GMT -6
So far, July 1902 I've tried to get along with all nations since I just don't have the budget for a full scale war. This is what the Japanese did. I am also going after submarines and torpedoes along with Fleet tactics and small ship tactics. The better we fight, the more chances we have to win a battle and war.
I am at January 1903 and coastal submarines are available. I will construct about 30 of these ships to give me an edge against the German's and Russian's.
Well I have over 20 submarines and I am rebuild my armored cruiser and light cruisers. I will stop playing until tomorrow. I am at November 1906 and no wars.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 21, 2018 23:56:58 GMT -6
Well, decided to finish game. No wars, a good size navy considering the historical money available. Did it prove anything to me? No, except that if the Japanese had been more conservative, less aggressive, they would have avoided a war with the US; their worst nightmare that came true.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 29, 2018 13:38:37 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 22, 2018 17:51:00 GMT -6
Well, I had ship blow up today playing the German's. (I was playing Japan) This is only my second. It occurred when my force of two battleships and support ships were sailing and were protecting a convoy. I spotted a scout cruiser and I knew immediately this was an ambush.... I was right. I did a 90 degree turn to starboard and firewalled it. Unfortunately, a golden BB struck my ship and POOF, no more battleship. Frustrating because I know better, I should have not have made the turn, but simply sailed by them, then turned. This is what I have done in the past and works every time. Ich!! Must be the Christmas spirit getting to me or..... perish the thought.... I am getting old. Nope, that isn't it, just busy. Ok, well we will go back at it after Christmas and the new year.
|
|