|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 30, 2020 16:38:20 GMT -6
A question to the team: why doesn't Russia have the ability to build airbases on the Black Sea. I would recommend Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya. There are also no fleet bases, like Odessa, and the others. Did I miss something?
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Apr 30, 2020 17:39:56 GMT -6
A question to the team: why doesn't Russia have the ability to build airbases on the Black Sea. I would recommend Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya. There are also no fleet bases, like Odessa, and the others. Did I miss something? No other in game navy can reach the black sea, so it would be kind of pointless. Turkish/Ottoman control over the strait means that theirs no military travel between the black sea and Mediterranean, at least for capital ships and wartime ships |
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 30, 2020 18:04:59 GMT -6
A question to the team: why doesn't Russia have the ability to build airbases on the Black Sea. I would recommend Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya. There are also no fleet bases, like Odessa, and the others. Did I miss something? No other in game navy can reach the black sea, so it would be kind of pointless. Turkish/Ottoman control over the strait means that theirs no military travel between the black sea and Mediterranean, at least for capital ships and wartime ships If I make treaty or pact with the Ottoman Turks then I can gain passage through the Dardanelles. It was done in real history. Russia could help A-H with Italy. They could engage France and Britain. So I have to disagree. |
|
|
|
Post by gildeddawn on Apr 30, 2020 19:56:24 GMT -6
No other in game navy can reach the black sea, so it would be kind of pointless. Turkish/Ottoman control over the strait means that theirs no military travel between the black sea and Mediterranean, at least for capital ships and wartime ships If I make treaty or pact with the Ottoman Turks then I can gain passage through the Dardanelles. It was done in real history. Russia could help A-H with Italy. They could engage France and Britain. So I have to disagree. It actually wouldn't be that hard to add a "Southern Russia" (or whatever they wanted to call it) territory to the Mediterranean region, but I also don't think it is going to be very high on the devs' priority list.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 30, 2020 20:04:22 GMT -6
If I make treaty or pact with the Ottoman Turks then I can gain passage through the Dardanelles. It was done in real history. Russia could help A-H with Italy. They could engage France and Britain. So I have to disagree. It actually wouldn't be that hard to add a "Southern Russia" (or whatever they wanted to call it) territory to the Mediterranean region, but I also don't think it is going to be very high on the devs' priority list.
It wouldn't but it would be historically accurate add more to the Russian geopolitical area to be defended and to be used as an offensive launching point. I agree, though, I don' believe it would be high on their list. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on May 1, 2020 0:25:59 GMT -6
If I make treaty or pact with the Ottoman Turks then I can gain passage through the Dardanelles. It was done in real history. Russia could help A-H with Italy. They could engage France and Britain. So I have to disagree. It would be very hard for Russia to negotiate a pact that allowed them free transit of warships in both peacetime and wartime that would be in place for any significant length of time. Firstly, because even if not directly involved in a war, it is in Turkey's interests not to have a naval battle erupt in the middle of their capital. Secondly, because whenever Turkey has been perceived to have granted a particular nation special privileges with regards to warships transiting the straits, they have been put under significant diplomatic and even military pressure to level the playing field by other powers. |
|
|
|
Post by gildeddawn on May 1, 2020 1:00:17 GMT -6
I agree. Basically, it would be open to everyone in peacetime and closed to everyone in wartime (everyone that was in the war). It would be really difficult to implement any sort of mechanic related to negotiating with the Ottoman Empire in game, but it would be really historically inaccurate to just add the territory and not address it. The only way I see this making sense is if they add the Ottoman Empire as an [officially supported] playable nation, but even then it would only make sense to include the territory if the player was playing as the Ottoman Empire.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 1, 2020 8:29:28 GMT -6
I believe that you need to do some research on the value of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and the history of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. This is and has been, a vital geopolitical area to the history of the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Anyway, my suggestion stands, air bases and fleet bases to be occupied by choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on May 1, 2020 12:49:17 GMT -6
I believe that you need to do some research on the value of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and the history of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. This is and has been, a vital geopolitical area to the history of the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Anyway, my suggestion stands, air bases and fleet bases to be occupied by choice. I mean.... in the time period of this game the Russian black sea fleet has performed interestingly in wars: Russo-Japanese War-Sailed to the other side of the world to be destroyed WWI-Destroyed by land invasion WWII-Destroyed by land invasion |
|
|
|
Post by gildeddawn on May 1, 2020 13:58:46 GMT -6
I believe that you need to do some research on the value of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and the history of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. This is and has been, a vital geopolitical area to the history of the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Anyway, my suggestion stands, air bases and fleet bases to be occupied by choice. I believe you need to do some research on the history of the Russian Black Sea fleet. Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, even up to the present day, access to the Black Sea has been strictly governed by a series of treaties involving Russia and the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, sometimes with other European powers signing as well. At no point has unrestricted access been allowed to warships of all navies. The Russian Black Sea fleet existed mostly to counter the navy of the Ottoman Empire or anyone else that would seek to attack Russian interests in the Black Sea. From its inception, the Black Sea fleet has never once sortied out of the Black Sea in wartime. Even at the Battle of Navarino, the only time the Russian navy has fought in the Mediterranean (unless we count their ongoing intervention in Syria, but I'm not getting into that), the Russian component of the allied squadron came from the Baltic fleet, not the Black Sea fleet. Naval actions against Russia in the Black Sea have occurred, but they have been isolated and typically small in scale, and have also been limited almost exclusively to the Ottoman navy itself acting against Russia in wars between the two, either alone or with support from other navies. Which brings me to Seawolf's comment. Seawolf is mistaken, in that it was the Russian Baltic fleet (or most of it), not the Black Sea fleet, that sailed halfway around the world only to get utterly annihilated at the Battle of Tsushima. The Black Sea fleet was busy cooling its heels in the Black Sea, somewhat rebelliously I might add, because the Ottomans would not let it through the Turkish Straits. |
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 1, 2020 14:16:47 GMT -6
I believe that you need to do some research on the value of the Russian Black Sea Fleet and the history of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. This is and has been, a vital geopolitical area to the history of the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Anyway, my suggestion stands, air bases and fleet bases to be occupied by choice. I believe you need to do some research on the history of the Russian Black Sea fleet. Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, even up to the present day, access to the Black Sea has been strictly governed by a series of treaties involving Russia and the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, sometimes with other European powers signing as well. At no point has unrestricted access been allowed to warships of all navies. The Russian Black Sea fleet existed mostly to counter the navy of the Ottoman Empire or anyone else that would seek to attack Russian interests in the Black Sea. From its inception, the Black Sea fleet has never once sortied out of the Black Sea in wartime. Even at the Battle of Navarino, the only time the Russian navy has fought in the Mediterranean (unless we count their ongoing intervention in Syria, but I'm not getting into that), the Russian component of the allied squadron came from the Baltic fleet, not the Black Sea fleet. Naval actions against Russia in the Black Sea have occurred, but they have been isolated and typically small in scale, and have also been limited almost exclusively to the Ottoman navy itself acting against Russia in wars between the two, either alone or with support from other navies. Which brings me to Seawolf's comment. Seawolf is mistaken, in that it was the Russian Baltic fleet (or most of it), not the Black Sea fleet, that sailed halfway around the world only to get utterly annihilated at the Battle of Tsushima. The Black Sea fleet was busy cooling its heels in the Black Sea, somewhat rebelliously I might add, because the Ottomans would not let it through the Turkish Straits. That is entirely correct, the Baltic Fleet was redesignated the 2nd Pacific Squadron and it sailed to Northeast Asia. There was some rebellious attitudes on the Potemkin. However, six transports from the Black Sea Fleet did sail through the Dardanelles and joined up with the squadron sailing through the Suez Canal. |
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 1, 2020 14:28:18 GMT -6
I would question what value there would be in having airbases in Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya within the game; all of those are a good 400-500nmi or more away from the Dardanelles and the Turkish Mediterranean coastline and another hundred or more nautical miles away from locations where you're actually likely to see naval engagements within the game. Even on Light Load, Medium Bombers and Flying Boats probably won't have the range to reach that far until at least the mid-'30s, and at that point in time it'll probably take them three or four hours to make the flight to the target area; later in the game, they might have the range to reach it on Medium or even Heavy load, but you'd likely still be looking at over an hour in flight just to reach targets hugging the Turkish coastline. As such, I would suggest that aircraft based in Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya would be of negligible utility within the game except in the unlikely circumstance of naval engagements taking place in the Black Sea itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 1, 2020 15:24:13 GMT -6
I would question what value there would be in having airbases in Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya within the game; all of those are a good 400-500nmi or more away from the Dardanelles and the Turkish Mediterranean coastline and another hundred or more nautical miles away from locations where you're actually likely to see naval engagements within the game. Even on Light Load, Medium Bombers and Flying Boats probably won't have the range to reach that far until at least the mid-'30s, and at that point in time it'll probably take them three or four hours to make the flight to the target area; later in the game, they might have the range to reach it on Medium or even Heavy load, but you'd likely still be looking at over an hour in flight just to reach targets hugging the Turkish coastline. As such, I would suggest that aircraft based in Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, Yalta, and Yevpatoriya would be of negligible utility within the game except in the unlikely circumstance of naval engagements taking place in the Black Sea itself. Ok, remove the thread as useless. I am done. |
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 1, 2020 15:35:26 GMT -6
Using air force through Turkey, it would have huge political consequences.
Really in the timeframe of RTW2, Black sea is isolated from rest of seas and oceans, so I think it is correct not having Black sea in RTW. Because if it was in RTW, it would need to be confined in Black sea, so for RTW purposes it has no meaning.
|
|
|
|
Post by gildeddawn on May 1, 2020 18:11:54 GMT -6
The only reasonable way to include it would be as a separate region. The Bosporus would be a territory and would work similar to the Panama and Suez canals. Everyone could cross it in peace time, but in war only its controller and their allies could use it. I don't see the value, though. The starting controller would have to be the Ottoman Empire, which means they would have to be added to the game (although I wouldn't mind that), and it still wouldn't work unless they were in that particular save. There also would be no alternative means of access for whoever didn't control the straits. Also, it would probably have to be a home region for the Ottoman Empire because it is literally where their capital city is, which would make taking it as Russia impossible.
The Black Sea fleet was always Russia's smallest and least important fleet, often little more than a coastal defense force. As I said before, yeah the devs could do it. Adding a whole new region would be harder than just adding a territory, but they could do it. However, it's not going to be high on their priority list and I don't think it should be. The historical reasons are also valid, but honestly they're a moot point because this alone is probably too much of an obstacle.
|
|
