|
Post by generalvikus on Jan 28, 2018 2:54:20 GMT -6
Discussion so far has been great, but in the interests of moving things along at a brisk pace, I'd like to propose the following:
- I'll now create the thread for formal ballot proposals and another thread for the ballots themselves. The 'proposals' thread will be the place where people submit exactly what they want to be written on the ballot in a standard format. The actual ballot thread will be a thread exclusively for the regular ballot posts themselves, so only I'll post in that one.
- Proposals will be made for the first pre-game ballot, which will concern force structure. Proposals will include the number of ships of each type and role (so, for example, distinction is to be made between fleet and colonial cruisers) but will only include the ships that are to be part of the existing fleet - not ships that are under construction at the beginning of the game.
- Once the proposals have been submitted, we'll vote on the ballot.
- It will then be the job of the design board (remember, anyone who wants to join any of the boards can do so, or you can start your own board) to discuss the requirements for each ship type - that is, the discussion we're having now about how large and fast each of these types should be.
- While the design board is deliberating on that, the rest of us will be free to discuss other matters that need resolving, such as diplomacy, technology, fleet readiness, and deployment.
- Once the design board has completed its deliberation, the ship design competition will begin (remember, anyone can enter this, and it will be resolved by another ballot.) Another thread will be created for ship design submissions. If the design board can't agree, then it can submit multiple proposals for us to vote on in a separate ballot.
- Then, finally, it will be the job of the construction board to submit proposals for ships under construction at the start of the game, based on the starting fleets of other countries (we really shouldn't decide on what we're going to have under construction until we've taken a look at the Almanac.)
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 28, 2018 4:13:37 GMT -6
Would you like to do legacy fleet manualy or not?
May be I suggest to od it automatically and than decide about placement of the ships and construction program. I think that the discussion about legacy fleet could be quite long especially without agreed on grand strategy first as different grant strategies requires completely different classes of ship. Hence I would suggest first to define the grand strategy.
Example and my suggestion: Grand strategy Basic strategy is to protect whole empire with minimum of 110 % of capital ships relating to 2 great European powers. Our strategy for the colonies (all except Norther Europe) is to have cruiser fleet in peace time. And in case of increasing threats of other powers supllement this cruiser fleet with battleship fleet. However in peace of time all our capital ships will be in NE and only armored cruisers will show flag elsewhere. Our strategy should be that everywhere in the world we should have basic for maintaining fleet that can fight local force. So we should
Build strategy Our fleet should consist of some excelent top class ship with some of them focusing on speed however our main force should be more focused on numbers to protect our worldwide empire which emphassies cost effectivenes thus, firepower and protection, not the speed as the speed is the most costly. For our destroyer boat I suggest that we should have 1.5 destroyers for every capital ship at 1900 and have 20 % reserve for these types. For our cruisers we should have armored cruisers comparable to others 2 powers, rest protected cruisers. We should set up number of cruisers for domestic and foreign stations and have reserve of 20 %. Our battleships should have numbers to 2 other European powers with 10 % reserve. If any funds remains we should distribute them to increase reserve in all type of ships.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 28, 2018 4:16:21 GMT -6
I completely agree with Admiral Aeson we do not need ships with high speed as we protect our interest not attack. And we use the numbers we can send to opppose any thread. We need cost effective ships.
As case for predreadnought there is no need for more than 19 knots ships, there are too expensive and as our experience show they tend to be quickly absolute and relegated for other duties. For that we need ships which could support our forces and be cheap. There is no point to have super pre-dreadnought which will costs us 50 % more maintenance costs.
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jan 28, 2018 4:32:49 GMT -6
Would you like to do legacy fleet manualy or not? May be I suggest to od it automatically and than decide about placement of the ships and construction program. I think that the discussion about legacy fleet could be quite long especially without agreed on grand strategy first as different grant strategies requires completely different classes of ship. Hence I would suggest first to define the grand strategy. I considered having an automatically generated legacy fleet so we could get into the game quicker, but I decided against it because this 'pre-game period' is a sort of dry - run for the real thing. We need to work out how the game is actually going to work - how proposals are submitted, how ballots are conducted, how long everything takes, and so on. Bugs in the system need to be worked out - for example, I only came up with the idea of creating an entirely new forum about an hour ago once I realised how many threads we actually need to make this work properly. (For anyone who hasn't seen that post yet, please let me know what you think: nws-online.proboards.com/post/24518/thread) More than that, this offers an opportunity for everybody to get used to how everything works so that there's minimal confusion once the game properly begins. Finally, though I can see the attraction of getting things done quicker, I think that since we've already put a good deal of effort into debating the legacy fleet, it would be a shame to throw all of that away now.
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jan 28, 2018 4:39:21 GMT -6
Build strategyOur fleet should consist of some excelent top class ship with some of them focusing on speed however our main force should be more focused on numbers to protect our worldwide empire which emphassies cost effectivenes thus, firepower and protection, not the speed as the speed is the most costly. For our destroyer boat I suggest that we should have 1.5 destroyers for every capital ship at 1900 and have 20 % reserve for these types. For our cruisers we should have armored cruisers comparable to others 2 powers, rest protected cruisers. We should set up number of cruisers for domestic and foreign stations and have reserve of 20 %. Our battleships should have numbers to 2 other European powers with 10 % reserve. If any funds remains we should distribute them to increase reserve in all type of ships. I agree with all of the principles you've outlined here. Would you like to propose a legacy fleet force structure for the ballot? (That is, the number of ships of each type, and the rough amount of funds to be allocated to each one?) If so, you can do that here: nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1320/advance-britannia-council-ballcot-proposals
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 28, 2018 4:46:21 GMT -6
Build strategyOur fleet should consist of some excelent top class ship with some of them focusing on speed however our main force should be more focused on numbers to protect our worldwide empire which emphassies cost effectivenes thus, firepower and protection, not the speed as the speed is the most costly. For our destroyer boat I suggest that we should have 1.5 destroyers for every capital ship at 1900 and have 20 % reserve for these types. For our cruisers we should have armored cruisers comparable to others 2 powers, rest protected cruisers. We should set up number of cruisers for domestic and foreign stations and have reserve of 20 %. Our battleships should have numbers to 2 other European powers with 10 % reserve. If any funds remains we should distribute them to increase reserve in all type of ships. I agree with all of the principles you've outlined here. Would you like to propose a legacy fleet force structure for the ballot? (That is, the number of ships of each type, and the rough amount of funds to be allocated to each one?) If so, you can do that here: nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1320/advance-britannia-council-ballcot-proposalsAs i write you privetaly we should split whole process into smaller steps (from global strategy through class design to allocation of each ships) as for UK the whole picture in one ballot is too much in one basket.
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jan 28, 2018 4:58:52 GMT -6
As i write you privetaly we should split whole process into smaller steps (from global strategy through class design to allocation of each ships) as for UK the whole picture in one ballot is too much in one basket. Yes, that was the idea I had as well - the first ballot which we're doing now pertains only to force structure - the number of ships of each type. There will be several more ballots before the game properly starts, and once the game has started there will be one ballot for every game period of approximately 3 - 12 months, which shouldn't be too crowded. I also came up with the Design and Construction Boards partly for the purpose of narrowing things down, so instead of choosing from all possible options, the Boards will narrow it down to just a few options for each ballot in their respective spheres.
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jan 28, 2018 6:45:35 GMT -6
Some of the ships you've listed here have assigned roles - like the colonial vessels, scouts, and raider. However, others have no apparent role - like the second rate battleship and cruiser, and the 400 ton destroyer. As far as I can tell, they are just slightly inferior versions of the first rate ships of each of those types. What is their purpose? Numbers, staggering the fleet development cycle to avoid boom bust. We dont need everything to be uber. Size discipline and the fight against oversized ships is a virtue. To this end, we (obviously) need a battle fleet that can comfortably overpower any of our European rivals. I think we also need sufficient forces to not only protect our colonies, but also properly dominate the fight overseas. I think powerful light cruisers, built specifically with colonial service in mind, are a good choice, and should be backed up by a few heavier ships like CAs or refitted old battleships, as the game progresses, that can be shifted around to wherever they need to be (and some destroyers, of course). The North Sea station welcomes a fight in any craft, large or small, so long as we get to bring torpedoes into the fray. Given the excellence of British shipbuilding, we should have the numbers to sustain any distant engagement no matter the size of the ships. It is in a close engagement that we need to be afraid of a stroke of bad fortune. For this reason we must have submerged torpedoes in order to avoid adding unnecessary vulnerability.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Jan 28, 2018 7:50:31 GMT -6
The start fleet should consist of ships for various purposes. Battleships:- first rate - 12"-13" guns, around armor 9-10", 1.5" deck (more is waste), speed 19 knots - second rate - 12" guns, around, 8-9" belt armor, 1.5" deck, speed 18 knots - third rate (colonial) - e.g. South Asia - 10-11" guns, armor about 7", deck armor 1"., speed 18 knots maximum - cheap design as possible Basic concept is comming from the fact that even in large fleet battles usually only part of the fleet engaged themself so there is no need for only first class battleships. The first class battleships could be around 1/4 of all capital ships. Armored cruisers: - first rate - 23 knots (more speed is too expensive for UK), 2x2x10" max, 6" secondary max., armor to resist 10" guns - second rate - 20-22 knots, 2x2x8" guns, rest 6" guns, armor to resists 10" guns - third rate - 19-20 knots, 2x2x8" and rest 5" guns, armor to resist 8" guns - minimal costs for using as colonial cruiser Protected cruisers- first rate - 6.000 tons max (there is no need to have large cruisers as AI do not build anything comparable for long time period and at this time these cruisers should be transferred to other duties), 2x2x8" guns - second rate - 3.000-4.500 cruisers - decent speed 5"-6" guns - third rate - smalll cruisers for colonial operation and raider operation - could be slow and usually 5" guns - scout - small 2.100 tons with maximum speed - raider - small 2.100 tons, low speed 18 knots, but heavy armnament to resist enemy protected cruisers (AI does not build large cruiser and these type are able to resist interception by enemy protected cruiser and their low speed is not a problem as raiders they will not fight any other type of ships) Destroyers:- 400 tons - main workforce, later submarine hunters (UK has no need to have only 500 tons destroyers) - 500 tons - 10-25% of the destroyers Some of the ships you've listed here have assigned roles - like the colonial vessels, scouts, and raider. However, others have no apparent role - like the second rate battleship and cruiser, and the 400 ton destroyer. As far as I can tell, they are just slightly inferior versions of the first rate ships of each of those types. What is their purpose? Regarding the idea that since not all ships will be used in each battle, only a few need to be first - rate; this might be true if you could choose what ships to use in each battle but were still limited in number. However, since the ships are selected for us, I can't see the advantage of having a large number of inferior ships and gambling that we'll get to use the good ones when we need them. In my view, each class in the fleet should perform its given role as cost-effectively as possible, whether it's expensive and few in number or cheap and numerous. Furthermore, while extensive specialisation will be required for playing the UK on very large fleet size, a lack of standardisation will cause its own problems. If, for example, we end up in a fleet battle consisting of a mix of first rate and second rate battleships, armoured cruisers, and protected cruisers, all of these ships will have different speeds, limiting them being only as fast as the slowest vessel of their own type. This is a good summation of my objections to specialization. The way the game works, you won't be able to make use of the specialized roles anyhow, so IMO tactical compatibility (i.e. fewer classes) is a better approach. This goes for the 20/21 kt B's- we'll pay a premium for them, but won't be able to make use of them as intended. The 'fast wing' battle line role in the early game will be provided by the Fleet CA's. Note that my recommended design has pretty good armor. Actually, when I play early Fleet Battles, I'll only use speed on the approach in order to get position if needed. Once I close, I will drop to cruising speed. Because of horrendous station keeping and signalling, this allows following divisions the speed cushion necessary to catch up and maintain fleet unity. I've slept on the 8k ton super cruiser thing, and having a class of them (say 4 or so) for hunting raiders could be useful. But perhaps it might be better to hold off on building them for a few years so that we can get some early machinery/hull tech advances to make a more effective design. But really I think they're about the same role as the 10k ton 8" CA's. Historically, the British did build some large protected cruisers (the Powerful Class) in the 1890's, and they were decommissioned prior to WW1, while earlier armored cruisers and smaller protected cruisers were still serving.
|
|
|
Post by oaktree on Jan 28, 2018 8:35:12 GMT -6
A quick question since it will apply to the legacy designs, and I am not sure myself. Are all the gun quality values preset for beginning of the game? Or is there some random factor at play which might grant the UK at the start of the game wit, for example, quality 0 8" guns while 7" and 9" are quality -1? Just curious since this would definitely affect initial designs in my opinion. I presume the 11"+ guns are preset and the UK has 12" -1 and 13" -2 available.
Also, will the Design Board be setting research priorities?
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jan 28, 2018 11:47:21 GMT -6
A quick question since it will apply to the legacy designs, and I am not sure myself. Are all the gun quality values preset for beginning of the game? All initial gun qualities are set in BNat for the default powers and in the nation file for the custom powers.
|
|
|
Post by parrot on Jan 29, 2018 4:29:12 GMT -6
I generally avoid trying to specialise my designs too much, beyond perhaps a home/colonial distinction (and even then, my colonials fleets are usually mostly old ships from the main fleet). I'll reiterate that I'm used to small budgets, so a lack of specialisation is probably due to the fact that I'll never be building more than one class of a given type at any moment. Still, I don't see much value in the idea - if you had more control over the structure of your forces and when/where you fight, there may be more merit to the idea, but in RTW you don't have that sort of control. I think that if we design a CL, for example, we should be building only that CL until we're ready for a new class to supersede it. The only exception to this should be designing ships specifically for colonial service. Also, even though we have a huge budget, every little still counts, and the savings from not building a wide array of classes would still be welcome - one extra cruiser can make all the difference sometimes.
Also, to sort of repeat what I said in my last post: colonial cruisers should be stronger, not weaker than our cruisers in Europe (or at least on par with them). A CL in Europe will be fighting alongside a whole bunch of other ships, including our battleships, so it doesn't need to be as powerful as a CL that may well be fighting largely on its own in some far-flung corner of the world. Additionally, a decently powerful CL will probably go a long way to keeping our sanity in check and our empire intact - if enemy raiders have a good chance of sinking our colonial CLs when they run into each other, we'll be continually frustrated by losing isolated ships and probably having to take ships away from the main theatre to deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jan 29, 2018 13:10:06 GMT -6
First, a note on terminology: Ship types are indicated as [major type][minor type][specialization, where applicable], with major type being B for battleship, C for cruiser, and D for destroyer. Minor types for battleships and cruisers are 1 for first class, 2 for second class, and 3 for third class, or for destroyers T for ocean-going torpedo boats and D for torpedo boat destroyers. Specializations are r for raider, c for colonial, and e for fleet scout/escort. I propose that the legacy fleet be a battle fleet of ten B1 of 16,000 tons carrying four 12" guns and capable of 19 knots, two C1 of about 15,000 tons carrying four 10" guns and capable of 23-24 knots, and eight C2 of about 5,000 tons carrying fourteen 6" guns; and a colonial fleet composed of three C1c of 10,000 tons carrying four 8" guns and capable of 23 knots, eleven C2c of 4,800 tons carrying eleven 6" guns and capable of 23 knots, and nine C3c of 2,400 tons carrying eleven 5" guns and capable of 23 knots, all fitted for colonial service. This will allow the Royal Navy to fulfill its foreign station requirements for under 420M while maintaining a battle fleet almost certainly superior to that of any two other European powers, and will leave enough funds available for the construction of about a dozen ocean-going torpedo boats or torpedo boat destroyers and about a dozen light coastal patrol craft while retaining c.24M for the ongoing construction phase of the legacy fleet build. The colonial fleet would be distributed thusly: - The Mediterranean: 1 C1c, 3 C2c, 2 C3c - West Africa: 2 C3c - Indian Ocean: 3 C2c, 1 C3c - Southeast Asia: 3 C2c, 1 C3c - Northeast Asia: 1 C2c, 1 C3c - North American East Coast: 1 C1c, 1 C3c - The Caribbean: 1 C2c, 1 C3c - North American West Coast: 1 C1c (The pairs of C3c on the Mediterranean and West Africa stations could be replaced by a single C2c for an additional 1.3M per pair replaced.) While I would prefer to leave the ongoing construction to the determination of the Third Sea Lord after a review of contemporary fleets, I would suggest that a safe bet would be to have an additional two first class battleships, two first class cruisers, and four second class cruisers be under construction for the battle fleet at the start of the game, with the remaining budget surplus (c.3-4M/month) allocated to building coastal fortifications in strategically-important or particularly vulnerable locations (e.g. the Caribbean and North American East Coast, if we choose to pursue wars with the United States), gunnery training, or research, or to additional ships if the review conducted by the Third Sea Lord determines them to be necessary. While I also generally avoid heavily specializing my ship designs, I'd note that a specialized legacy colonial fleet can save a considerable amount of funds, especially for a power like Great Britain with enormous foreign station requirements. For example, fredsandford's proposed colonial fleet of seven 6,000t C2 and nine 10,000t C1 costs about 33% (nearly 140M - not a small sum, even with Great Britian's starting fund of almost 1.3B) more to build and about 36% (980k/month) more to maintain than my proposed colonial fleet of three 10,000t C1c, eleven 4,800t C2c, and nine 2,400t C3c. I wouldn't recommend maintaining distinct lines of modern colonial and battle fleet classes, though.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 29, 2018 15:09:30 GMT -6
While I also generally avoid heavily specializing my ship designs, I'd note that a specialized legacy colonial fleet can save a considerable amount of funds, especially for a power like Great Britain with enormous foreign station requirements. For example, fredsandford's proposed colonial fleet of seven 6,000t C2 and nine 10,000t C1 costs about 33% (nearly 140M - not a small sum, even with Great Britian's starting fund of almost 1.3B) more to build and about 36% (980k/month) more to maintain than my proposed colonial fleet of three 10,000t C1c, eleven 4,800t C2c, and nine 2,400t C3c. I wouldn't recommend maintaining distinct lines of modern colonial and battle fleet classes, though. I agree with UK it is nessesary to specialize to save funds as historically done. I put some sugestion on different forum too. It is quite similar to yours, however with such commitment I suggest going down with the speed. For protected cruisers going from 22 knots to 23 knots is usually about 20 % more costs and from 23 knots to 24 knots additional 33 %, so going from 22 knots to 24 knots is usually 60 % more costs. It means that instead of 5 cruisers with 24 knots, you can have 8 cruiser with 22 knots. For colonial duty I can not see advantage of 24 knots cruiser for such high costs. This increase of costs is not so high in case of battleships, so 18-19 knots is not the issue. For armored cruisers it is around 10 % of costs above 20 knots of speed, so it is not so high as for protected cruisers. However for colonial duties the speed is not important you need to defend not sink at all costs. You can look at this 2 cruisers for raider duties. The difference is only 10 % of the costs however 23 knots cruiser is inferior to 19 knots cruiser in fighting capabilities. 23 knots cruisers would be sunk as her speed does not help her. However 19 knots cruiser can fight for long time as her firepower and armor is very good. As long as there is no armored cruisers in area in distant areas she is usefull for much longer time period. If you liked to have 19 knots cruiser with this armor and firepower changed to 23 knots the price would increase from 2100t and 7.358 costs to 4900t and 19.320 costs, so more than double costs. I would prefer 2 crusiers with 19 knots and limited their used on not important areas where they should not meet any armored cruisers. And UK should have no problem to send armored cruisers in area where enemy armored cruisers are.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Jan 29, 2018 16:14:01 GMT -6
Guerre de Course is the tactic of a weak navy. The Royal Navy does not raid, the Royal Navy blockades. Besides, in terms of point values, raiding isn't worth it. Even an AMC is worth about 145-150 points. That's 29-30 merchant vessels that need to be sunk (@5 points each) just to break even. Even small CL's are worth double that, raising the bar even higher. Blockading nets 200-250 points per turn, easily enough to offset enemy raiders, and adds discontent at a faster rate than raiding.
|
|