|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 3, 2019 20:12:44 GMT -6
I know what you are going to say. Ok, the old man is gone crazy. This is naval warfare game, not a climatology game. However, I remind all of you of the famous Dust Bowl in the United States in the 1930's and the movement of people westward and how it affected the economics and politics of the US. A sudden drought in a nation can cause great starvation and unrest, causing rebellions. It can also cause a nation to invade another to get food and other necessities. Droughts can cause water wars, if the nation in question cuts off the supply of river water to another. Climate change in and of itself, does not necessarily cause war, but it can establish the conditions that will lead to war. A great war, like WW1 and it's aftermath and a climate change can lead to a government changes that can lead to more war. Here is some data.
Soviet Union 1921-22 Nine million people died, massive crop failures. The Lenin government did nothing.
Soviet Union 1932-34 Seven and eight million people died.
North-West China 1927 between three to six million died
India(Bengal) 1943 2.1 to 3 million died
China 1929 2 million died.
What are the possible economic, social and military repercussions of such droughts, hard to know.
|
|
|
Post by admiralhood on Jan 3, 2019 22:46:08 GMT -6
Not only climate change, the 1923 Great Kantō earthquake has also had a significant impact on the Japanese society and played a key role in transforming the Japan Empire, once a civilized open-minded country(one of the ‘Big Five’) into a fierce totalitarian militarism beast.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 3, 2019 23:20:43 GMT -6
Not only climate change, the 1923 Great Kantō earthquake has also had a significant impact on the Japanese society and played a key role in transforming the Japan Empire, once a civilized open-minded country(one of the ‘Big Five’) into a fierce totalitarian militarism beast. Yes, and thank you for including that. I believe we should expand the subject to environmental changes including geologic upheaval like earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunami's, climatic changes whether naturally caused or caused by human beings. We can propose possible environmental changes, and then try to chart how this would effect the social, political and economical aspects of a nation and the resultant military effects. We can also reverse this idea, and examine environmental problems caused by wars. The dam-buster raids of 1943, the Yellow River Flood of 1938, the flooding of the Pontine Marshes in 1944 and the use of chemical weapons in both wars had a large effect on the climate. Even the two A-bombs dropped on the Japanese did have an effect on the environment. The problem is that this might be too much detail for the game, but it would be interesting to pursue.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Jan 4, 2019 2:04:18 GMT -6
In an attempt to keep this board focused on the game Rule The Waves, climate change as a driver for political upheaval can already be imagined to be incorporated in RTW/RTW2. Along with the "unrest" mechanic, there are already events in the game that state that a new government has taken power, both in your own country and others. No explicit reason for the change is given, it just happens. If one wishes to suppose that the political change happens in response to a climatic event, feel free.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 4, 2019 4:10:57 GMT -6
It depends on what happened.
If you take some one catastrophe like flooding, vulcane erruption etc. it has several effects. The people die, property is destroyed so country is getting poorer. However there is need to rebuild a lot of things to it increase demand. If economy is on top it is nothing positive but if there is large unemployment and economy is down it could help economy to get back on track. It is similar effect as WW2 for USA. However it does not work on large scale as destroyed Germany after WW2.
In case of starving as in Soviet Union it have no possitive effect at all. However what is difference between democracies and authoritarian regimes is that in democracies there is much more awareness, people expect much more money is going to them to have better living conditions. In case that tension rises for democracies is much more difficult to have higher % of military spending compared to economic power of the country.
Note: just thinking not complete analysis
|
|
|
Post by hrcak47 on Jan 4, 2019 6:43:45 GMT -6
This is honestly taking things too far. RtW2 is, after all, a game, and not the world simulator.
Whats next, tsunamis oneshotting entire player fleet thanks to a random diceroll?
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on Jan 4, 2019 6:55:46 GMT -6
Soviet Union 1921-22 Nine million people died, massive crop failures. The Lenin government did nothing.
Soviet Union 1932-34 Seven and eight million people died.
In case of Soviet Union, number of lives lost had a more to do with politics than climate. Instead of searching for the solution, soviet govt always went for finding people to blame and murder. I'd have to look for a first period (I know there was drought in Europe at this time) to check actual results, but in the thirties Stalin was busy destroying farmers, especially on Ukraine (and I do not mean people with a lot of land, I mean small family sized farms) to allow for the collectivisation - formation of huge state owned and controlled farms, governed just like soviet factories.
This resulted in a massive drop in productivity, but most importantly, the starvation was weaponised by Soviet Govt - Troops were sent to take the crops, over and over, until people entire regions had absolutely nothing to eat, not to mention seeds for the next year.
Besides, there was no such thing as "unrest" in Soviet Union at least until late 1960s or so. Any form of independent thought, when discovered, would result in a trip to prison camp in Siberia or instant execution. Everybody was indoctrinated that it was a good thing to denounce any kind of suspect thought resulting even in children denouncing their own parents As result people were too terrified to engage in opposition.
Climate had profound effect on many human behaviours, so do not underestimate it's result on politics. While there is rarely a single reason for anything happening in the world, we should never throw away the possible explanations.
That is interesting, could you elaborate how the the earthquake influenced Japanese politics.
The big question is if and how to implement it in game.
As Fredsanford already wrote, there are random events already. Adding new ones may simply be too out of scope to devote limited resources. 1923 earthquake is a thing that could be added as it was a big thing and result in destruction of some ships under construction and maybe affect government but it affect only Japan. If we add this what other historical events would we need to add?
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Jan 4, 2019 9:56:10 GMT -6
1923 earthquake is a thing that could be added as it was a big thing and result in destruction of some ships under construction and maybe affect government but it affect only Japan. If we add this what other historical events would we need to add? Personally, while I wouldn't be adverse to events based upon historical occurrences, I wouldn't want specific ones included. Otherwise you'd end up with players preparing for events they should have no knowledge of.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 4, 2019 10:05:06 GMT -6
Soviet Union 1921-22 Nine million people died, massive crop failures. The Lenin government did nothing.
Soviet Union 1932-34 Seven and eight million people died.
In case of Soviet Union, number of lives lost had a more to do with politics than climate. Instead of searching for the solution, soviet govt always went for finding people to blame and murder. I'd have to look for a first period (I know there was drought in Europe at this time) to check actual results, but in the thirties Stalin was busy destroying farmers, especially on Ukraine (and I do not mean people with a lot of land, I mean small family sized farms) to allow for the collectivisation - formation of huge state owned and controlled farms, governed just like soviet factories.
This resulted in a massive drop in productivity, but most importantly, the starvation was weaponised by Soviet Govt - Troops were sent to take the crops, over and over, until people entire regions had absolutely nothing to eat, not to mention seeds for the next year.
Besides, there was no such thing as "unrest" in Soviet Union at least until late 1960s or so. Any form of independent thought, when discovered, would result in a trip to prison camp in Siberia or instant execution. Everybody was indoctrinated that it was a good thing to denounce any kind of suspect thought resulting even in children denouncing their own parents As result people were too terrified to engage in opposition.
Climate had profound effect on many human behaviours, so do not underestimate it's result on politics. While there is rarely a single reason for anything happening in the world, we should never throw away the possible explanations.
That is interesting, could you elaborate how the the earthquake influenced Japanese politics.
The big question is if and how to implement it in game.
As Fredsanford already wrote, there are random events already. Adding new ones may simply be too out of scope to devote limited resources. 1923 earthquake is a thing that could be added as it was a big thing and result in destruction of some ships under construction and maybe affect government but it affect only Japan. If we add this what other historical events would we need to add?
I simply added some figures to illustrate the effects of droughts and such. The 1923 Earthquake could and should be simulated in the game and the effects on Japanese politics, economics and society could affect its government policy. However, Italy has a gunsight on it, it gets earthquakes all the time and has Vesuvius and Mount Etna as volcanoes. Almost every nation in the world, including England and Germany along with France have such disasters. The last three have meteorological disasters like the storms that hit Normandy and the Polar Vortex which can completely disrupt activities in these nations.s. It is just a suggestion to get everyone thinking about the effects of natural disasters on how a government deals with them and their effects on their geopolitics. This game, is a world simulator, wars have world effects and the conditions that lead to them, are developed by humans and humans are affected greatly by these natural occurrences. Study the Bronze age and especially the events in late Bronze age that essentially destroyed numerous civilizations that actually had an international trading system between them. Once the trading system was disrupted, all empires that were dependent on other nations fell apart. It was the beginnings of globalization, a process that restarted in the early 20th century. We are just duplicating that 3000 year old system. It has been recorded that numerous earthquakes, commonly called a swarm, hit the area, wrecking cities and island empires. This same swarm, could occur in many spots and do the same thing. During WW2, Vesuvius erupted heavily damaging Allied aircraft on nearby runways. If Etna blew during a conflict between Italy and France, it could disrupt combat and trade routes, Hawaii is a series of island created by a hot spot, which just erupted. It could have happened in WW2 causing damage to Oahu and Hawaii, Iceland sits on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and it has many volcanoes. If they erupted they can reduce flying ability across the North Atlantic and convoys. The Malacca Straits near Singapore can be disrupted by volcanism and earthquakes in the Dutch East Indies, and those same volcanoes and earthquakes can totally disrupt Japanese Southeast Asian forces by wrecking their bases. The list goes on and on. It can and does happened. It is just an idea to consider and possibly add more realism to an already excellent game.
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Jan 5, 2019 13:13:32 GMT -6
We are getting a bit far off the scope of the game I think. The game covers a period of time and the technologies of the period as far as navies go. It doesn’t cover history exactly. It allows for you to create your own history based upon the demands of the AI government. Natural disasters would have to be random events that could greatly effect your nation’s budget and might cost you a ship or three but I think from a gameplay perspective most players would hate it. Picture this, the lead ship of your new class of 50K ton armored aircraft carriers is just 4 months away from joining your fleet. You’ve spent roughly 3 million a month of your budget for the last 30 months to get to this point. It’s been tough on your other building programs but you’ve managed to get 2 cruisers laid down recently and you also have 2 destroyers and 3 corvettes building. One BB is in for refit/repair. Suddenly RNGesus decides to hit you with a massive earthquake and tsunami. Your new incomplete carrier is too badly damaged to continue. Your BB was lifted and pushed inland by the tsunami. It’s hull is badly strained and it’s too heavy to move with existing technology. The only way to get it cleared is to scrap it in place. One of your new cruisers fell off the slip onto the neighboring DD and wrecked them both. The economic impact and recovery is so severe it sets your nations economy back five years, impacting your ability to maintain your existing operations let alone try to build new ships. The bases in the area are damaged and loose significant capacity as a result. Let’s say your largest building docks were damaged so now you’re not capable of building 50K ton ships. The biggest you can build are 40K ton. Now let’s add in that your nation had been at war at the time. It hadn’t gone all that great the first 4 months but it’s turning around now and you know you are going to have your opponent begging for peace within 6 months. Unfortunately, due to the economic and social impact delivered by RNGesus you don’t get that opportunity as your government begs for peace and your opponent is happy to agree on the condition you give up your base in X region. Any one of these effects would be maddening but combining them like this, as they would potentially be for ‘realism’, would make me want to throw my keyboard through my monitor. Keep in mind this can occur to any nation. 1906 San Francisco earthquake and 1886 Charleston earthquake come to mind. There is also the Cascadia Subduction Zone in the US Pacific Northwest. How about a massive eruption of Campi Flegrei in Italy? The Italian city of Naples could be obliterated and it could have global implications like a Yellowstone or Toba eruption.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 5, 2019 13:34:22 GMT -6
We are getting a bit far off the scope of the game I think. The game covers a period of time and the technologies of the period as far as navies go. It doesn’t cover history exactly. It allows for you to create your own history based upon the demands of the AI government. Natural disasters would have to be random events that could greatly effect your nation’s budget and might cost you a ship or three but I think from a gameplay perspective most players would hate it. Picture this, the lead ship of your new class of 50K ton armored aircraft carriers is just 4 months away from joining your fleet. You’ve spent roughly 3 million a month of your budget for the last 30 months to get to this point. It’s been tough on your other building programs but you’ve managed to get 2 cruisers laid down recently and you also have 2 destroyers and 3 corvettes building. One BB is in for refit/repair. Suddenly RNGesus decides to hit you with a massive earthquake and tsunami. Your new incomplete carrier is too badly damaged to continue. Your BB was lifted and pushed inland by the tsunami. It’s hull is badly strained and it’s too heavy to move with existing technology. The only way to get it cleared is to scrap it in place. One of your new cruisers fell off the slip onto the neighboring DD and wrecked them both. The economic impact and recovery is so severe it sets your nations economy back five years, impacting your ability to maintain your existing operations let alone try to build new ships. The bases in the area are damaged and loose significant capacity as a result. Let’s say your largest building docks were damaged so now you’re not capable of building 50K ton ships. The biggest you can build are 40K ton. Now let’s add in that your nation had been at war at the time. It hadn’t gone all that great the first 4 months but it’s turning around now and you know you are going to have your opponent begging for peace within 6 months. Unfortunately, due to the economic and social impact delivered by RNGesus you don’t get that opportunity as your government begs for peace and your opponent is happy to agree on the condition you give up your base in X region. Any one of these effects would be maddening but combining them like this, as they would potentially be for ‘realism’, would make me want to throw my keyboard through my monitor. Keep in mind this can occur to any nation. 1906 San Francisco earthquake and 1886 Charleston earthquake come to mind. There is also the Cascadia Subduction Zone in the US Pacific Northwest. How about a massive eruption of Campi Flegrei in Italy? The Italian city of Naples could be obliterated and it could have global implications like a Yellowstone or Toba eruption. I don't honestly think that a little randomness of natural disasters is beyond the scope of the game. As you have explained well, there are consequences for all nations. I think it would add to the realism of the game. This is what I am proposing.
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on Jan 5, 2019 15:25:23 GMT -6
I simply added some figures to illustrate the effects of droughts and such. The 1923 Earthquake could and should be simulated in the game and the effects on Japanese politics, economics and society could affect its government policy. However, Italy has a gunsight on it, it gets earthquakes all the time and has Vesuvius and Mount Etna as volcanoes. Almost every nation in the world, including England and Germany along with France have such disasters. The last three have meteorological disasters like the storms that hit Normandy and the Polar Vortex which can completely disrupt activities in these nations.s. It is just a suggestion to get everyone thinking about the effects of natural disasters on how a government deals with them and their effects on their geopolitics. This game, is a world simulator, wars have world effects and the conditions that lead to them, are developed by humans and humans are affected greatly by these natural occurrences. Study the Bronze age and especially the events in late Bronze age that essentially destroyed numerous civilizations that actually had an international trading system between them. Once the trading system was disrupted, all empires that were dependent on other nations fell apart. It was the beginnings of globalization, a process that restarted in the early 20th century. We are just duplicating that 3000 year old system. It has been recorded that numerous earthquakes, commonly called a swarm, hit the area, wrecking cities and island empires. This same swarm, could occur in many spots and do the same thing. During WW2, Vesuvius erupted heavily damaging Allied aircraft on nearby runways. If Etna blew during a conflict between Italy and France, it could disrupt combat and trade routes, Hawaii is a series of island created by a hot spot, which just erupted. It could have happened in WW2 causing damage to Oahu and Hawaii, Iceland sits on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and it has many volcanoes. If they erupted they can reduce flying ability across the North Atlantic and convoys. The Malacca Straits near Singapore can be disrupted by volcanism and earthquakes in the Dutch East Indies, and those same volcanoes and earthquakes can totally disrupt Japanese Southeast Asian forces by wrecking their bases. The list goes on and on. It can and does happened. It is just an idea to consider and possibly add more realism to an already excellent game. Rabaul is situated in a caldera of a volcano that erupted in 1937 and 1994, on both occasions destroying settlements and infrastructure. Imagine 1937 eruption took place in 1942 or 1943...
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 5, 2019 15:35:27 GMT -6
I simply added some figures to illustrate the effects of droughts and such. The 1923 Earthquake could and should be simulated in the game and the effects on Japanese politics, economics and society could affect its government policy. However, Italy has a gunsight on it, it gets earthquakes all the time and has Vesuvius and Mount Etna as volcanoes. Almost every nation in the world, including England and Germany along with France have such disasters. The last three have meteorological disasters like the storms that hit Normandy and the Polar Vortex which can completely disrupt activities in these nations.s. It is just a suggestion to get everyone thinking about the effects of natural disasters on how a government deals with them and their effects on their geopolitics. This game, is a world simulator, wars have world effects and the conditions that lead to them, are developed by humans and humans are affected greatly by these natural occurrences. Study the Bronze age and especially the events in late Bronze age that essentially destroyed numerous civilizations that actually had an international trading system between them. Once the trading system was disrupted, all empires that were dependent on other nations fell apart. It was the beginnings of globalization, a process that restarted in the early 20th century. We are just duplicating that 3000 year old system. It has been recorded that numerous earthquakes, commonly called a swarm, hit the area, wrecking cities and island empires. This same swarm, could occur in many spots and do the same thing. During WW2, Vesuvius erupted heavily damaging Allied aircraft on nearby runways. If Etna blew during a conflict between Italy and France, it could disrupt combat and trade routes, Hawaii is a series of island created by a hot spot, which just erupted. It could have happened in WW2 causing damage to Oahu and Hawaii, Iceland sits on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and it has many volcanoes. If they erupted they can reduce flying ability across the North Atlantic and convoys. The Malacca Straits near Singapore can be disrupted by volcanism and earthquakes in the Dutch East Indies, and those same volcanoes and earthquakes can totally disrupt Japanese Southeast Asian forces by wrecking their bases. The list goes on and on. It can and does happened. It is just an idea to consider and possibly add more realism to an already excellent game. Rabaul is situated in a caldera of a volcano that erupted in 1937 and 1994, on both occasions destroying settlements and infrastructure. Imagine 1937 eruption took place in 1942 or 1943... This is correct, Rabaul is a caldera that has been most active from 1937 to 1943. The 1994 eruption simply leveled everything. There are four adjoining volcanic centers aligned north-south through the northern extremes of the eastern New Britain. a real event like the 1994 eruption, would have been a disaster for both the Japanese who were there, and the Allies who would be in the area. Something to consider and that is why I brought the subject up.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jan 5, 2019 15:43:51 GMT -6
We've been discussing natural disasters like volcanism, earthquakes, Tsunami's but here is one that can strike Europe, Canada and all the way down to Las Vegas and San Diego. For those of you in England, think about this possible event during 1940-42. Germany, Scandinavia, the Mediterranean areas like Italy, Greece. France can get this. This kind of natural event can essentially send the ice from the Artic into the trade lanes that are used move supplies to and from the US to Europe during a possible war. metro.co.uk/2018/12/13/polar-vortex-hit-uk-snow-plummeting-temperatures-8240821/
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jan 5, 2019 15:48:16 GMT -6
From a gameplay perspective, disaster based event that triggers tension or ship destruction is, IMO, quite interesting. A important factor of rtw is that the player never have total control, we have to deal with what government toss us. It is ofcourse outside the scope of the game to have us try to fight disasters, but this could certainly be a opportunity to shake things up.
Perhaps a upcoming war that you are hoping to win now just got derailed cuz earthquake wrecked many in construction ships and messed up your budget/politician don’t want war in face of a disaster at hand. I agree the current system more or less cover these with generic events, but I feel they can be a little more destructive. That said I can see some players being annoyed by things like this so large disasters can maybe be a togglable option.
|
|