|
Post by babylon218 on Feb 28, 2021 11:03:26 GMT -6
First, lovely job cranking out the high quality content at a fast pace. I have been reading this with great interest. Second, if I may weigh in on the battlecruiser/heavy cruiser debate, it occurs to me that at present, the cost difference between the B2 and A2 is roughly that of an 81:55 ratio, such that for the cost of five battlecruisers, you could get eight heavy cruisers. I don’t know for sure what the dispositions of the other powers are, but I would think that quantity would have to be a bit more important than quality to Britain as it has so much of the map to defend and an increasingly smaller budget ratio to the other powers as the game goes on. Parity in many areas might be preferable over supremacy in a few. First, thank you for the praise! It really does make it worthwhile knowing that others are interested and enjoying this. Second, feedback is always welcome! And you make a good point RE: Quality over Quantity. Here's the almanac page for the current date for everyone to have a look at: So, of interest to note: The USA currently has a larger budget (by about 15%), but most of that is being spent on their CL programme: by my reckoning, each of their CL should be costing them about 1.8Mn per month, and their monthly budget after fundamental expenditures like Maintenance and Research. They also have more aircraft than I do, and may be performing gunnery training, so by my reckoning their monthly funds available for construction is roughly equivalent to mine, meaning with their current programme they're either running a deficit or they're just about breaking even. Now, I'm also running a deficit (3.5M per month with 21M reserves). But, I'll be finishing five Tartars within the next six months, which should allow me to break even barring any budget events: Failing that, I may have to suspend one of the Camperdowns for a few months to build up some surplus. For the new construction, the CA counter is evidently the most pressing, so I think your suggestion to build the CA design as a priority is probably pretty sound. The only caveat is that France has seven CAs and tensions with them are high (7). Now, I've assigned Australia and New Zealand to the Pacific Fleet to counter the Battlecruiser Tourville (6x12", 26kn, c.1913) and two of their CAs: the Montcalm with 10x9" guns (though only an 8-gun broadside) and the Chanzy with 8x10" guns. Neither are well armoured, and neither can outrun the Warspites (and that's before we add Ark Royal to the mix!) so I'm gambling I can win a quick victory and sink them ant then bring either Australia or New Zealand back to Europe to help against the rest of the French Fleet. I still have Warspite and Indefatigable in Home Waters and my battleline vastly outnumbers that of France, so I'm not worried on that front. The issue is math: They have 2 CAs in SE Asia, 2 in N Europe, and... oh, the other three? They're scattered over the entire globe! One's off W Africa right now (but I suspect they're on FS, so they'll keep moving), another's leading a small French Squadron in the Indian Ocean, and the third is in the S Pacific. The irony is this is exactly why I built the Warspites, and I don't have enough of them. I'm really regretting not taking France's colonies off her now...
|
|
|
Post by prophetinreverse on Feb 28, 2021 17:28:53 GMT -6
First, lovely job cranking out the high quality content at a fast pace. I have been reading this with great interest. Second, if I may weigh in on the battlecruiser/heavy cruiser debate, it occurs to me that at present, the cost difference between the B2 and A2 is roughly that of an 81:55 ratio, such that for the cost of five battlecruisers, you could get eight heavy cruisers. I don’t know for sure what the dispositions of the other powers are, but I would think that quantity would have to be a bit more important than quality to Britain as it has so much of the map to defend and an increasingly smaller budget ratio to the other powers as the game goes on. Parity in many areas might be preferable over supremacy in a few. First, thank you for the praise! It really does make it worthwhile knowing that others are interested and enjoying this. Second, feedback is always welcome! And you make a good point RE: Quality over Quantity. Here's the almanac page for the current date for everyone to have a look at: View AttachmentSo, of interest to note: The USA currently has a larger budget (by about 15%), but most of that is being spent on their CL programme: by my reckoning, each of their CL should be costing them about 1.8Mn per month, and their monthly budget after fundamental expenditures like Maintenance and Research. They also have more aircraft than I do, and may be performing gunnery training, so by my reckoning their monthly funds available for construction is roughly equivalent to mine, meaning with their current programme they're either running a deficit or they're just about breaking even. Now, I'm also running a deficit (3.5M per month with 21M reserves). But, I'll be finishing five Tartars within the next six months, which should allow me to break even barring any budget events: Failing that, I may have to suspend one of the Camperdowns for a few months to build up some surplus. For the new construction, the CA counter is evidently the most pressing, so I think your suggestion to build the CA design as a priority is probably pretty sound. The only caveat is that France has seven CAs and tensions with them are high (7). Now, I've assigned Australia and New Zealand to the Pacific Fleet to counter the Battlecruiser Tourville (6x12", 26kn, c.1913) and two of their CAs: the Montcalm with 10x9" guns (though only an 8-gun broadside) and the Chanzy with 8x10" guns. Neither are well armoured, and neither can outrun the Warspites (and that's before we add Ark Royal to the mix!) so I'm gambling I can win a quick victory and sink them ant then bring either Australia or New Zealand back to Europe to help against the rest of the French Fleet. I still have Warspite and Indefatigable in Home Waters and my battleline vastly outnumbers that of France, so I'm not worried on that front. The issue is math: They have 2 CAs in SE Asia, 2 in N Europe, and... oh, the other three? They're scattered over the entire globe! One's off W Africa right now (but I suspect they're on FS, so they'll keep moving), another's leading a small French Squadron in the Indian Ocean, and the third is in the S Pacific. The irony is this is exactly why I built the Warspites, and I don't have enough of them. I'm really regretting not taking France's colonies off her now... France has had a consistently higher budget than Germany and Russia, and they haven’t been at war with you recently, so why on earth is their navy so small? I mean aside from those heavy cruisers, nearly every other power in the game should have an advantage over them.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Feb 28, 2021 18:28:13 GMT -6
First, thank you for the praise! It really does make it worthwhile knowing that others are interested and enjoying this. Second, feedback is always welcome! And you make a good point RE: Quality over Quantity. Here's the almanac page for the current date for everyone to have a look at: View AttachmentSo, of interest to note: The USA currently has a larger budget (by about 15%), but most of that is being spent on their CL programme: by my reckoning, each of their CL should be costing them about 1.8Mn per month, and their monthly budget after fundamental expenditures like Maintenance and Research. They also have more aircraft than I do, and may be performing gunnery training, so by my reckoning their monthly funds available for construction is roughly equivalent to mine, meaning with their current programme they're either running a deficit or they're just about breaking even. Now, I'm also running a deficit (3.5M per month with 21M reserves). But, I'll be finishing five Tartars within the next six months, which should allow me to break even barring any budget events: Failing that, I may have to suspend one of the Camperdowns for a few months to build up some surplus. For the new construction, the CA counter is evidently the most pressing, so I think your suggestion to build the CA design as a priority is probably pretty sound. The only caveat is that France has seven CAs and tensions with them are high (7). Now, I've assigned Australia and New Zealand to the Pacific Fleet to counter the Battlecruiser Tourville (6x12", 26kn, c.1913) and two of their CAs: the Montcalm with 10x9" guns (though only an 8-gun broadside) and the Chanzy with 8x10" guns. Neither are well armoured, and neither can outrun the Warspites (and that's before we add Ark Royal to the mix!) so I'm gambling I can win a quick victory and sink them ant then bring either Australia or New Zealand back to Europe to help against the rest of the French Fleet. I still have Warspite and Indefatigable in Home Waters and my battleline vastly outnumbers that of France, so I'm not worried on that front. The issue is math: They have 2 CAs in SE Asia, 2 in N Europe, and... oh, the other three? They're scattered over the entire globe! One's off W Africa right now (but I suspect they're on FS, so they'll keep moving), another's leading a small French Squadron in the Indian Ocean, and the third is in the S Pacific. The irony is this is exactly why I built the Warspites, and I don't have enough of them. I'm really regretting not taking France's colonies off her now... France has had a consistently higher budget than Germany and Russia, and they haven’t been at war with you recently, so why on earth is their navy so small? I mean aside from those heavy cruisers, nearly every other power in the game should have an advantage over them. Well, there are a few possibilities. Firstly, I think I recall reading France reducing her budget a few times due to social unrest. Secondly, what you can't see in that screenshot is that France has over 40 subs and has been preempting the Bohemian Corporal with the Atlantic Wall by about a decade! I just checked my Intel reports, and they've built at least two 12" and 6" coastal batteries in Western France since the war, and have a total of 30 across their entire empire. They've also built a ton of airbase - me and the US have 600 aircraft each. France has half that, and is still beating both Germany and Russia. Also, while France's budget is superior to Germany's right now, Germany's base resources is quite a bit higher (France is at around 16,000, Germany 18,000). Remember, I recently gave the Germans a big pasting, so their budget is probably recovering still. As for the rest, all I know for sure is that France has been suspending construction of various ships, including its CAs, for years. I think they must have ordered too many ships at once and then the AI kept the programme going to its full conclusion. Other than that, I got nothing. EDIT: I just checked; all but two of those subs were built from 1922, and SIXTEEN were built in 1928, with another 11 built between 1925 and 1927. Yeah, I think we found where France's budget went! EDIT 2: Oh yeah...France appears to have had collosal budget trouble. I had an Intel report in 1923 that France had a balance of about 500. Now, three of their CAs, a CL, and four subs commissioned in '23/'24, France's massive sub programme started in '25, and for the past few years they've been rebuilding CAs and BCs into mediocre CVLs. I almost don't want to force a war and obliterate that decade of sub, Cruiser and carrier build-up out of pity Almost.
|
|
|
Post by prophetinreverse on Mar 1, 2021 18:51:58 GMT -6
Fascinating. It is almost as if the AI is genuinely trying to implement a “course de guerre” strategy to fight a superior main battle fleet. With apologies to the developers, I did not think the game AI could be that sophisticated.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Mar 2, 2021 6:03:38 GMT -6
Fascinating. It is almost as if the AI is genuinely trying to implement a “course de guerre” strategy to fight a superior main battle fleet. With apologies to the developers, I did not think the game AI could be that sophisticated. Let's not give the AI too much credit. . I believe there was an issue in RtW1 where the AI could get stuck in a never ending sub-expansion loop if you gave it too big a thrashing. That being said, the war with France ended before I could deliver such a thrashing (assuming I didn't lose more DDs first). I suppose the French AI could have gotten hit by the Inconsistent Naval Policy trait twice in a row. To add to the Intel, I know for a fact France suspended construction of a BC in '27 due to financial issues, but their newest BC is from 1917,so either that Intel was one of their old BCs being rebuilt (the timing's about right) or France started a new BC and then cancelled it.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Mar 2, 2021 13:39:52 GMT -6
The ‘New Napoleon’
February 1932 saw the House of Commons approve the Naval Defence Act, 1932, authorising an increase in the naval budget to provide for the construction of several heavy cruisers in order to counter the increased threat from France. The first of these heavy cruisers (which were already being planned based on the Heavy Cruiser A2 design) would be laid down in April of that year as ‘HMS York’. Armed with twelve 9.2-inch guns in four triple turrets arranged as superfiring pairs fore and aft, twelve 4.5-inch dual purpose guns in shielded twin mounts, eleven 2pdr pom-poms, twenty-six 20mm Oerlikons, and two triple torpedo launchers, these ships were designed to locate and deter the heavy cruisers of other nations, and in particular those of France, as the Warspite-Class battlecruisers could not hunt down every French heavy cruiser simultaneously. April would also see the Avro Firefly selected to replace the Baulton Paul Barracuda as RAF Coastal Command’s main flying boat.
British Heavy Cruiser 'HMS York'.
August saw a change in government in France, with Allington cautioning against too much optimism for a reduction in tensions when asked for comment by The Observer.
The next month saw a decision to convert the older Kale and Wear-Class Destroyers for use as convoy escorts to deputise for the worn-out Gala-Class. The rebuild would see their 4.5-inch guns replaced by two dual-purpose twin mounts, the fitting of fire control directors, the removal of one torpedo launcher, and the replacement of the older engines for lower-power units capable of 26kn – too slow for realistic fleet operations, but plenty enough for convoy escort duty.
January 1933 would be the month that the FAA would approve the Bristol Roc to operate alongside the Supermarine Gauntlet.
In March, British agents in Paris managed to gain access to details of the French Battleship ‘Courbet’, which had begun construction the previous year. Armed with ten 380mm guns in five twin turrets, fourteen 150mm guns in twin turrets, and eight 100mm dual-purpose guns. The main belt was only 12 inches thick, though Allington suspected it was probably inclined for maximum protection, with a deck 3.5 inches thick. Certainly a dangerous ship, but not requiring any immediate response beyond ‘St. Vincent’ and ‘Ushant’ already under construction.
French Battleship 'Courbet'.
Much of the destroyer rebuild programme completed in May 1933, with eight of the Gala-Class destroyers being scrapped for replacement by the rebuilt Wears and Kales. This freed up sufficient funds to lay down the second ‘York-Class’ heavy cruiser as ‘HMS Lincolnshire’.
The Labour First Lord of the Admiralty, A.V. Alexander, began pressing the Admiralty to build more cruisers to counter the threat of the French heavy cruisers and the new American light cruisers of the Raleigh and Columbia-Classes. Allington resisted his calls for nine new cruisers, stating unequivocally that the budget could not stand such a building pace, but agreeing to find the funds to lay down six. Meanwhile, Ordnance reported it had developed a dual-purpose 5.25-inch gun mount.
To fund the new cruiser programme, construction of ‘Ushant’ was temporarily suspended. A third York-Class was laid down as ‘HMS Devonshire’, with a fourth ship to follow in October as ‘HMS Norfolk’. Meanwhile, detailed design work began on the B2 Light Cruisers.
British 'Crown Colony-Class' Light Cruiser 'Jamaica'.
The beginning of the year saw the embezzler Alexandre Stavisky found dead in a chalet in Chamonix. While French Police ruled the death a suicide, many Parisian newspapers suspected he had been shot by the police. In the aftermath of Stavisky’s death, details of his links to the French establishment emerged and led to the dismissal of several government ministers. In August, mass public protests and riots erupted, organised by the monarchist ‘Action Francaise’, conservative ‘Croix-de-Feu’, and the fascist ‘Mouvement Franciste’. Several protesters were killed when police opened fire, prompting the Mouvement Franciste rioters to storm the Palais Bourbon. The events of the 6 August Crisis caused the resignation of the centre-left Prime Minister Edouard Daladier to resign, leading to a right-wing coalition led by Marcel Bucard. Bucard was a classic Fascist strongman, cut from the same cloth as Mussolini in terms of his militaristic stance, fondness for military parades, and extreme anti-communist stance. He was also a fervent anti-semitic. He quickly abolished the Third Republic and established an authoritarian-totalitarian state.
Allington was extremely concerned by the Bucardist coup, and when the government pushed for cuts amidst the September 1933 economic crisis he argued furiously against it, even speaking before a Parliamentary Committee separately from Alexander. October would see the laying down of four B2 Light Cruisers; the ‘Crown Colony-Class’ Cruisers ‘Jamaica’, ‘Bermuda’, ‘Gibraltar’, and ‘Bahamas’. Meanwhile, design work had begun on their larger cousins of the A1 Design, the first of which would be laid down the following January as ‘Leicester’.
British 'Town (1933)-Class' Light Cruiser 'Leicester'.
The large-scale cruiser programme won Allington some applause in the Conservative papers and to a degree offset his vocal opposition to the MacDonald cabinet. Unfortunately, ‘York’s’ sea trials proved somewhat disappointing as she struggled to reach her 30kn design speed. February saw Baldwin’s Conservatives returned to Whitehall, this time in Coalition with the Liberals. With war with France seeming inevitable, the two parties agreed to appoint the Conservative MP Winston Spencer Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty. Churchill and Allington got along well, though Allington considered Churchill somewhat domineering and ‘a little too eager to get stuck in’. Churchill helped Allington secure funding from Parliament to complete the two Camperdowns – suspended in favour of the cruiser programme. ‘Howe’ was scrapped to release additional funds. While this technically left the Navy with fewer than three battle squadrons, Allington did not feel ‘Howe’ would contribute much to a modern battleship duel, and the ‘St. Vincent’ would complete by July in any case.
In March, Allington began to order the Admiral-Class Battleships in for rebuilds, consisting of relatively short and inexpensive modernisations. 5.25-inch dual purpose guns replaced the 4.5-inch secondary battery, AA directors were fitted alongside a formidable arsenal of 28 20mm and pom-pom mounts each, and the fire control system was modernised. To save costs and get the ship’s back into service as quickly as possible, they would not receive the 50-calibre 14-inch gun recently developed. ‘Nelson’ would be the first ship to receive modernisation.
‘St. Vincent’ commissioned in June 1934, with ‘Anson’ following ‘Nelson’ in for modernisation. The Air Ministry accepted the De Havilland Defiant fighter to replace the obsolete but venerable Vickers Gannet Mk.III.
Rumours surfaced in July that France had suspended the Courbet’s construction due to financial difficulties. Given his own recent financial troubles, Allington sympathised. With ‘Hermes’ in ordinary and vacant of aircraft, and in any event incapable of carrying a respectable air wing, she was sold off for scrap.
‘Anson’ rejoined the fleet in October, trading places with ‘Rodney’.
January 1935 witnessed the laying down of ‘HMS Salford’, a second ‘Leicester-Class’ cruiser, after the Clyde shipyards were short on orders and offered a competitive price.
‘Ushant’ commissioned in February, having been delayed slightly by the decision to fit her with a new, more-advanced director system. Meanwhile, France attempted to respond to a rebellion in the Dutch East Indies by seizing the island of Sumatra – ostensibly to protect shipping passing through the Malacca Straits from pirates, Ducard rejecting the idea that British ships based at Singapore would act to protect French shipping. It was exactly because of the proximity of Sumatra to Singapore that Allington and Churchill both advised the Foreign Office to take whatever steps necessary to prevent the French seizure of the island. Churchill stated “Ducard will not stop at just Sumatra. We cannot allow this to go any further than it has already gone.”
Fortunately, France backed down. However, Ducard openly denounced the British ultimatum, accusing the British of conspiring to put a stranglehold on French Indochina by maintaining their dominance over the Malacca Strait. Believing war was imminent in the next few weeks, Allington issued orders to partially-mobilise the Home Fleet and start crewing the ships which had been waiting in ordinary. He also issued a series of prewritten orders, to be activated as needed later.
‘Rodney’ returned to the fleet in March, and ‘Collingwood’ took her place in Portsmouth’s No.1 Basin.
‘Lincolnshire’ commissioned the following month, as Ducard’s government formally declared war on Britain over the Sumatra Affair. The strategic situation didn’t justify all twelve Battleships of the Royal Navy being in active service, so only the four ‘Camperdowns’ were kept on alert to contain the French Northern and Atlantic Fleets. Meanwhile, ‘Warspite’ was brought in for a rebuild replacing her 4.5-inch guns with 5.25-inch weapons, adding new fire control equipment, and twelve 2pdr pom-pom guns. She was also redesignated from Battlecruiser to Fast Battleship.
A new Mediterranean Fleet was organised under Admiral Sir Dudley Pound, led by ‘Inflexible’ and accompanied by ‘Eagle’, ‘Emerald’, ‘Enterprise’, ‘Endeavour’, and ‘Euphrates’, as well as the Heavy Cruiser ‘York’ and eight Kennet-Class Destroyers.
The Pacific Fleet under Admiral Sir Frederic Dreyer was ordered to hunt down and destroy the French heavy cruisers operating East of Suez, and Dreyer would resolve to begin by ordering ‘New Zealand’ and ‘Elephant’ to the Indian Ocean in order to eliminate the French squadron off Madagascar or, failing that, drive them into the East Indies. Meanwhile, Dreyer would prepare for an invasion of French Indochina to force the French squadron in the area to battle, beginning with the relatively undefended region of Tonkin. Though Tonkin lacked coastal batteries, unlike Annam and Cochin China, it did fall within the range of the French airbase at Port Bayard. For this reason, Dreyer kept ‘Ark Royal’ and his three remaining light cruisers in the area and requested further carrier reinforcements. The airbase at Hong Kong was to be built up as quickly as possible to attempt to suppress Fort Bayard, and the Light Carrier ‘Albion’ was sent to support Dreyer.
Seven years after taking his post of First Sea Lord, Allington was already thrust into the second war of his tenure. This time, he was determined to end it with success.
Screenshots to follow. Also, I'll post soon explaining my intentions in this war, since I have got something of a strategy which I'd like input on. Oh, also, when I do get the new screenshots up, you'll notice the top-down images look different. I've changed the deck colours in my preferences to reflect the deck colours used by the various nations semi-historically. It looks really good on some of the older designs.
|
|
|
Post by babylon218 on Mar 8, 2021 6:16:06 GMT -6
Okay, about time I actually got on with this. One, I am going to try and avoid engagements close to the French Channel Coast. Why? No reason! Generally speaking though, my plan is to try and eliminate the French colonial forces in the opening months of the war so I can concentrate my fleets in the Mediterranean and Northern Europe. Failing that, I'm going to try and pursue a campaign in Indochina to remove the majority of France's colonial income long-term - something that is going to be a challenge in of itself, and I'm inclined to pursue a Mediterranean Campaign over that if feasible. The important part either way is to reduce the French threat sufficiently that I can concentrate the carriers. Regardless which route I take, I need air cover.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Mar 10, 2021 11:57:13 GMT -6
I generally feel that economic damage resulting from the loss of a colony is largely or entirely offset by the reduction in expenditures resulting from the reduction in overseas commitments and I don't consider colonies worth taking only for economic reasons, so it seems to me that the primary objective of an Indochina campaign would reasonably be to remove the French presence in Southeast Asia, and in this I regard it as likely to fail - successfully completing three or four invasions in the course of a single war is rather hit-or-miss, and with three of the four territories of French Indochina being valued at five points each it's unlikely that you'd be able to complete the conquest of French Indochina at the peace table unless only one remains in French hands, even if you more or less entirely forego reparations at the peace table. As such, I would regard the conquest of French Indochina as more of an aspirational goal than a practical war aim and so I would be more in favor of a Mediterranean campaign than an Asiatic one. A Mediterranean campaign would also have the benefit of potentially removing up to eight potential French airbases (through the conquest of French North Africa and Corsica) which could threaten Mediterranean operations.
I am also somewhat more in favor of a Mediterranean campaign than an Asiatic one from a roleplaying perspective, as the Mediterranean route was a rather important seaway for the British Empire and, assuming you haven't already done so, the conquest of French North Africa would go a long ways towards securing it against a hostile France, at least in the relatively early days of air power. That said, Australia and New Zealand might be more in favor of an Indochinese expedition than a North African one, French forces in Indochina at least theoretically constitute a threat to Burma and Malaya, and perhaps also India and Australia, and a North African campaign would be easier for France to influence, so it's not like pursuing the conquest of French Indochina before starting a North African campaign would be entirely without justification, especially if it were felt that the French forces in Indochina, being much more isolated than French forces in North Africa, were more likely to capitulate at a relatively early stage of the war.
|
|