|
|
Post by Adseria on Nov 5, 2019 5:35:23 GMT -6
I was just playing Aurora 4x (a sci-fi grand strategy), and I was thinking that the way it handles shipyards might also work for RTW.
In Aurora, a planet can have multiple shipyards. Each of those shipyards has 2 main stats: The number of slipways, and the size of the slipways. For instance, a yard might have a capacity of 30,000 tons, and 2 slipways, meaning that it can build (up to) two ships at a time, with a maximum size of 30,000t. All slipways at a yard have the same size; however, slipways can build ships smaller than the maximum size (eg our 30,000t yard can build 5,000t ships if desired). On the other hand, this obviously means that the slipway is unavailable for construction of larger ships.
Shipyards can only build one type of ship at a time, even with multiple slipways available. When choosing a class to build, it takes time and resources (or funds, in the case of RTW) to retool for the new class. It is possible to retool to a new class while a slipway is already building an old class, and, when retooling is complete, it's possible to start construction of the new class in any available slipways. My thinking is that the retooling could replace or supplement the existing system of class development in RTW2; retooling a shipyard for a new class costs extra, while retooling for a class that has already been started at another yard is cheaper.
Shipyards are also used for refits, and for major repairs, although these are (naturally) faster and cheaper than building a new ship from scratch. However, a slipway that is repairing or refitting obviously can't be used for construction of new ships, and vice versa; a slip in the process of building a ship can't be used to repair or refit existing ships. However, upgrading a shipyard (adding slipways or growing existing ones) can be done while slipways are in use, without affecting ongoing ship construction, repairs or refits.
Shipyards in Aurora appear as targets for hostile forces; they can be shot at and boarded, just like any other ship, and they appear separately to the planet they are orbiting. Capturing a planet also results in the capture of any shipyards orbiting it. Obviously, RTW does things a little differently at the moment (all ships are considered to be built in the home area), but I imagine (read: hope) that it would be possible to change the system. Obviously, in most cases, having most, if not all, of your shipyards in your home area would be logical, but at the same time, it would make sense to have small shipyards in far-flung colonial territories for repairs and refits, particularly for colonially focused countries such as Britain, or countries that cover multiple zones, such as France and Russia.
I don't know if people will agree (based on my track record, probably not  ), but I think this system, or a simplified version of it, would be well suited to RTW's gameplay, and would add an interesting layer of management to the game.
Below, for anyone who wants to read further, is a link to the Aurora 4x wiki's page about shipyards.
aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=Shipyards
Obviously, we can ignore the part about naval vs commercial yards, for the purposes of RTW, at least until the trade system gets less abstracted. Other than that, I think most of the things mentioned on that page would fit quite nicely alongside the existing RTW gameplay. |
|
|
|
Post by dizzy on Nov 5, 2019 9:06:38 GMT -6
I like it! It'd be a mini-game managing your slipways, especially in times of war. I can imagine having to do a rework of the month long repair system. I mean, a damaged ship might still be forced to go out to sea because you can't wait for a slipway to free up...
I really like the slipways and dock size working in tandem. I'd pay money to see this implemented into the game in an intelligent way.
|
|
|
|
Post by wlbjork on Nov 5, 2019 9:35:35 GMT -6
I thought about this. The problem is, how to handle with some semblance of historical accuracy without giving the UK and USA a massive advantage?
Jane's Fighting Ships of WW2 names 31 companies with dockyards that had undertaken work for the British Admiralty, with another 13 expanded on - such as Harland and Wolff (Belfast): 19 slips fully equipped to build the largest types of naval and mercantile vessels; 5 graving Docks in close proximity to the works. (Glasgow) 7 large slips and graving dock adjoining. That alone would (hypothetically, at least) allow for the construction of 26 large ships and the repair/reconstruction of 6 simultaneously - through just one company.
|
|
|
|
Post by dizzy on Nov 5, 2019 11:02:43 GMT -6
That's the thing, you'd be building/repairing a lot of ships in foreign yards.
|
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Nov 5, 2019 18:03:44 GMT -6
That's the thing, you'd be building/repairing a lot of ships in foreign yards. Neutrals aren't really supposed to do that sort of thing for belligerents. It doesn't always stop them, of course, but since the game takes away the 10 points of basing capacity you get in a sea zone in peace time as a representation of being able to work out of ports belonging to other states despite warships belonging to belligerents conventionally being allowed a few days to resupply and conduct minor repairs in neutral ports during times of war I can't really see the game permitting more major repairs to be done overseas during a war, and usually there's very little repair work going on in the game in peacetime.
Also, I might be worried about players abusing such a system by ordering a bunch of cheap ships overseas to lock down, or at least severely limit, the shipyard capacity available to competitors - later in the game, especially as one of the wealthier powers, I can order a lot of cheap destroyers or corvettes for the cost of a modern battleship or an aircraft carrier, and I really don't much care if somebody seizes a bunch of my 500t Screw-You class destroyers armed with a 2" gun and a single torpedo tube at the outbreak of a war when what I gain from it is an almost total lack of major warship construction by the other powers during peacetime.
Beyond that, there was a thread not too long ago where people were complaining that there wasn't enough incentive to build ships domestically; now we have a thread which is essentially talking about incentivizing overseas construction by limiting domestic capacity?
|
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Nov 6, 2019 9:00:29 GMT -6
Why not just increase the cost significantly for ships built overseas? Like, a 10-20% increase? That seems pretty logical to me. That way, you still get the benefits of building in a foreign yard (primarily, access to the larger dock, plus tech they have that you don't, as I understand it?), but it's much more expensive than waiting to build an identical ship domestically. With the system I suggested above, you'd have a limited number of dockyards; I'd imagine most countries wouldn't be too excited about the concept of losing access to one of their largest slipways for anything up to 3 years (more if construction is delayed), so 10-20% seems fairly reasonable. Also, for further balancing, maybe the extra could go directly into the building nation's coffers, rather than vanishing into the aether like it normally would.
Repairs in foreign yards should probably be impossible. As I recall from the story of the Graf Spee, there were laws regarding warships in neutral ports during wartime; no major repairs other than those required to make the ship seaworthy, and no stays longer than 72 hours, according to the terms of the Hague Convention. This would seem to prevent repairs in shipyards of neutral countries, and you presumably won't be making repairs in enemy yards; that leaves allied countries, and it seems to me that that would be a reasonable restriction in terms of gameplay; I've never had an alliance with more than one country before, and even then, I spend more than 50% of the time without allies. As for peacetime, well, how are your ships going to get damaged if you're at peace?
Also, I might be worried about players abusing such a system by ordering a bunch of cheap ships overseas to lock down, or at least severely limit, the shipyard capacity available to competitors - later in the game, especially as one of the wealthier powers, I can order a lot of cheap destroyers or corvettes for the cost of a modern battleship or an aircraft carrier, and I really don't much care if somebody seizes a bunch of my 500t Screw-You class destroyers armed with a 2" gun and a single torpedo tube at the outbreak of a war when what I gain from it is an almost total lack of major warship construction by the other powers during peacetime.
What about if there was also a minimum size on a dockyard that only applies to foreign ships; say, 80% of maximum size? Most of the time that I've built ships overseas, it was because I didn't have a large enough dock of my own. This limitation wouldn't affect me much, and I assume a lot of people would be in the same boat. Even if you did want to build smaller ships for whatever reason, nations like Britain and the US would still have plenty of smaller yards you could use. Also, as I said above, most nations would be unwilling to give up a large slipway for a foreign power anyway, so they probably wouldn't give up a 70,000t slipway for someone to build a 500t destroyer. At the same time, limiting it to foreign ships would still allow the country owning the yard to use it for smaller ships if they choose.
Another option would be to give the building nation the opportunity to refuse a request; keep access to the slipway for their own use, but lose the payment I suggested.
|
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Nov 6, 2019 10:06:26 GMT -6
Why not just increase the cost significantly for ships built overseas? Because it's unrealistic? If you're a shipyard and you want to sell me a ship, you're going to have to offer me a price that's competitive with what other shipyards are offering, so if you're asking 10 or 20 percent more than I can get somewhere else then you'd better be offering a ship which is at least commensurately better than what I can get elsewhere - all the more so since 10 or 20 percent on a superdreadnought or a fast battleship is a decent chunk of an acceptable light cruiser. Also, making purchasing ships overseas more expensive while simultaneously limiting domestic capacity seems very likely to disproportionately hurt the smaller powers, because a big power like Britain or the USA will probably have more than enough shipyard capacity for its own needs whereas a power like Japan is more or less required to build its battleships overseas in the early stages of the game. |
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Nov 6, 2019 14:10:09 GMT -6
Because it's unrealistic? If you're a shipyard and you want to sell me a ship, you're going to have to offer me a price that's competitive with what other shipyards are offering... I don't agree. As I said in my last post, it seems logical to me that the cost would be higher for a foreign power because the local government would be unwilling to give up a major slipway for 3 years. Besides, the ships you'll be buying in foreign yards will usually be better than anything you could come up with domestically. You aren't just paying for the ship; you're paying for the use of the technology (licencing the guns, paying patent licences, things like that). ... if you're asking 10 or 20 percent more than I can get somewhere else then you'd better be offering a ship which is at least commensurately better than what I can get elsewhere... Considering that's the main incentive to build overseas in-game anyway, I should hope it would be. Perhaps 10-20% was a little high; I'm just throwing ideas out here. ... all the more so since 10 or 20 percent on a superdreadnought or a fast battleship is a decent chunk of an acceptable light cruiser... That's the point; there has to be a significant penalty, otherwise we're back to the problem of there being no reason not to build overseas. As I say, it might have been a little high, but I think it needs to be fairly high, to give you a reason to build domestically.
Incidentally, I notice you're spending a lot of time telling me how bad my ideas are, and not much coming up with other suggestions. Not that you're wrong, of course; I don't think I've ever had a good idea in my life
Also, making purchasing ships overseas more expensive while simultaneously limiting domestic capacity seems very likely to disproportionately hurt the smaller powers, because a big power like Britain or the USA will probably have more than enough shipyard capacity for its own needs whereas a power like Japan is more or less required to build its battleships overseas in the early stages of the game.
This is true. I'm open to ideas. Here's mine, but I don't think it's the best I've ever had:
This is a pretty major change to the game mechanics anyway; it would be a relatively minor change to increase starting money (for building legacy fleets), and/or budgets, for the smaller nations; not a huge increase, just enough to balance the increases in costs.
|
|
zer0
New Member
Posts: 2
|
Post by zer0 on Nov 6, 2019 17:00:19 GMT -6
Perhaps instead of getting that granular there could be a mechanic in place to limit production of ships to $X number of tons, or some sort of ratio between your maximum dock size, and the amount of ships you can produce.
If you had 20k docks, and you tried to build 2 20k BC's at once there could be a cost/time penalty for the second ship, that scales with how "over" you are.
Then again it would require reworking more than a few mechanics, and money already acts as the limiting factor in the number of ships you can build at once, so I'm not sure if there is much value here.
|
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Nov 7, 2019 16:45:51 GMT -6
Because it's unrealistic? If you're a shipyard and you want to sell me a ship, you're going to have to offer me a price that's competitive with what other shipyards are offering... I don't agree. As I said in my last post, it seems logical to me that the cost would be higher for a foreign power because the local government would be unwilling to give up a major slipway for 3 years. But for the powers most likely to have other nations wanting to buy ships (USA and Britain) the shipyards are less closely connected to the government and also likely to be building significant numbers of civilian vessels. Furthermore, both governments were under considerable domestic pressure to minimize military spending, so shipyards might actually be short on orders if there isn't enough domestic demand. |
|
|
|
Post by captainloggy on Nov 8, 2019 5:02:30 GMT -6
I think the most sensible penalty for building ships in foreign yards would be one in prestige, like the one already present for buying aircraft overseas. This could perhaps only apply to ships that are, say, less than 10% over your dockyard limits or not over limits at all. Also, the design should be available to the dock owner (like the British based HMS Tiger off the Kongos). On the other hand, having foreign ships being built in your docks reduces the probability of "shipyard short on orders" events. Also, if the contractor wants to scrap the ship, it could be sold to the builder instead.
|
|
), but I think this system, or a simplified version of it, would be well suited to RTW's gameplay, and would add an interesting layer of management to the game.
