DLC, an Italy AAR

[garrisonchisholm]

Paying the Piper

The final treaty in form only showed Italy needing to dispose of 1,300 tons of capital ships as defined as Battleships Battlecruisers and Carriers, however the total fleet size was exceeded by more than 200,000 tons, virtually mandating that the capital ship numbers be cut. In actuality the numbers were worse than the Admiralty first realized as submarine tonnage was also part of the equation, and if a full understanding had been achieved before orders began to be writ it is quite likely that some number of cruisers would have been retained rather than the entirety of the submersible arm. Ultimately however the decisions were struck, much to the outrage of a recently unconfined and headline-seeking Benito Mussolini.



The First Battle Division was sold off in its entirety, being both some of the oldest ships yet in inventory and also having achieved little in the recent conflict besides riding at anchor in Singapore and discouraging colonial invasion. The lone surviving San Marco-class was disposed of, as well as all of the Ninos from just the prior decade. It is probably true that with no treaty in place some support role would have been preserved for them, however such was not possible when the forthcoming Luigi Cadornas were so vastly superior. Unfortunately of the 12 of that class then building only 3 could be completed, with 6 old Turbine destroyers then being the last drops in treaty-demands bucket.

To Luigi's shock, consternation, fury, and – after a moment – resigned satisfaction, just 6 months after all the painful breakers-decisions the gripes groans and grousing of England brought the signatories together again with the treaty's future at stake!



By Luigi's instructions the Italian delegation advocated for preserving the treaty and allowing an increase in the total tonnages allowed each nation. This would permit then for an allotment to consider how to address the stillborn Calabria and Elba classes.



Winter and Spring of 1939 once again saw a parade of design proposals flowing through the Admiralty, as all three new capital ships were too large to reproduce. The eventual decision was, partly for logistic considerations, simply to make reductions in the gun-power of all 3 so-as to arrive at a similar ship which would at least be able to operate together with the originals. Disposing of the 8-inch guns on the Aquila design actually permitted adding a whole 4th squadron of aircraft on 4000 less tons, the tonnage being derived by the desire to field 5 carriers which could operate with Aquila plus as originally envisioned 6 further battleships and battlecruisers.

The Treaty's effect on the budget was rather harsh, so there was much musing over how to go about refitting the fleet as well as building the dozen-odd new capital ships seen as needed, not to mention the many expensive light cruisers now required, when the summer became suddenly turbulent. Luigi stoically faced yet another grim choice.

This time the unrest was swift and sudden, but the tired populace took matters into their own hands and the fascist rioters were dealt with in rude haste. Il Duce's fate was never determined, last having been seen in a melee at the harbor-side.

Luigi to all appearances spent that weekend occupied with gardening.

[maxnacemit]

How is submarine tonnage counted?

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 7, 2022 11:55:54 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

How is submarine tonnage counted?

Coastal Subs = 800

Medium/Minelaying = 1200

Long Range/Missile Subs = 2000

It isn't a confrontational tonnage, but due to it being on a different page the User forgot the notification about it being counted towards the treaty tonnage limits...   >.>

[garrisonchisholm]

 

King Umberto II of Italy

 

Two Decades of Sabers Rattled

No one had likely expected that the Disarmament Treaty of 1938 would last 21 years, but those that did could not have guessed that it would be ended by the King of Italy. But not Victor Emmanuel III. Not long after his father's passing Umberto II made his stamp upon the office by insisting that the treaty be cast aside with the proclamation that Italy would no longer be hobbled by shackles which only served to deny it its place in the sun. Luigi, he himself long approaching retirement, took this sea-change as a sign that he should hang up his braids, with the congenial Ammiraglio Carlo Bergamini taking the helm of the Fleet.

The two decades passed however were years of both profound progress and vexing vainglory by Italy's rivals. In 1941 Germany and Japan had the temerity to sign a pact to “contain Italian aggression”, and while this treaty was in place Japan occupied Borneo, which Luigi was unable to do anything about. In 1944 the Nazi Party came to power in Germany and in 1949 the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics erupted from a period of stark domestic turmoil. Germany and Japan renewed their pact in 1949 and 1954, though in 1959 they allowed it to lapse. Britain and France took turns courting Austria through the 50s though no agreement was for keeps. After Umberto saw to the destruction of the treaty, in 1961 France – in the midst of a now unlimited and truly mind-numbing building program – attempted to seize Hainan in South East Asia. Once Italy saw to an international flotilla to turn back their occupation France would sign a new treaty with Germany, again to contain Italian expansion, and one year later Japan would sign a treaty with Austria with the same objective, completing an encirclement of intent which none could deny. The cherry on top would come in 1964.

Italy appeared to have arranged to surround itself with hostility, as the more developed world economies saw blood in the water in the parsimonious interest the Italian Government had shown in supplying its Navy with new construction. What Navy Italy had were mustered at Naples.

(courtesy NWS Art Department)

New technologies filled these ships, and Italy - for all its intelligence could divine - counted itself the world leader in airpower and missile weapons, the supposed new deciding factor in war. Admiral Bergamini strove to accelerate the deployment of such weapons, which unfortunately had been delayed by The Abruzzi's commitment to completing the building programs he had put in place, though to be fair with the funds available a commitment to new procurement would only have meant a smaller fleet.

At last however the sabers were drawn.

Ammiraglio Bergamini called for an immediate review of the potential side's armaments even as the first huge air defense battles were occurring over the Piedmont.

(the next post will flesh out all the modern ships and weapons, at least so-far as I can manage without being stale. I know 20 years is a mad rush, but I think folks will be more interested to just jump into the new era as if they were picking up a board game, rather than slowly learn each stage of weaponry development as it was deployed but then only superseded.)

[fenisse]

Oh hey, that's my hometown! I can (almost) see my house from here!

Also, I was wondering what that WL:-405 stands for in the unrest level indicator. Is it just some debug stuff?

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 10, 2022 8:29:50 GMT -6 fenisse said:

Oh hey, that's my hometown! I can (almost) see my house from here!

Also, I was wondering what that WL:-405 stands for in the unrest level indicator. Is it just some debug stuff?

Yes it is debug info but it is hardly cryptic, simply a counter of how many consecutive months of Peace/War have been experienced, in this case 33 & 3/4 years since the end of the last war with France in 1931.

And that makes me wonder how many good seafood restaurants are in this photo.  ^.^  I'll guess... 8!   (I think I'll check google-maps when I can)

EDIT: For those who care it looks like there are actually 4, though if you go off the nor-nor-east edge of my harbour map about 1000 yards you will find, of course, a McDonald's.

[fenisse]

Jun 10, 2022 17:00:32 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

And that makes me wonder how many good seafood restaurants are in this photo.  ^.^  I'll guess... 8!   (I think I'll check google-maps when I can)

EDIT: For those who care it looks like there are actually 4, though if you go off the nor-nor-east edge of my harbour map about 1000 yards you will find, of course, a McDonald's.

Uh, I'd have guessed way more than four, though not surprising if google searches for seafood-only restaurants, as most places here will offer peppered mussels, spaghetti with clams, or whatever else seafood related, whilst not actually being seafood restaurants, but simple "restaurants".

Oh and there's, actually, two McDonald's in the frame: one north-northwest from Calabria, in the square opposite the castle (Castel Nuovo), and another in a building directly west from said castle.

DLC, an Italy AAR by garrisonchisholm, now compounded by useless facts on where to find McDonald's in Naples, by fenisse.

[garrisonchisholm]

King Umberto II of Italy

Into the Looking Glass

Imperial Majesty.

We can shortly expect war with France Germany and England, with Austria and Japan likely joining them if the war persists through the bulk of next year. Our economy has hobbled us since the end of the treaty while the jackals have surged. Since the treaty ended in 1959 France has launched 13 fleet carriers, with a 14th working up and 3 more due over the next 12-15 months. Germany has 13 with the last working up. Well over half of these carriers are designed to operate jets, whereas we were only able to upgrade our largest – Aquila – to carry but a single squadron. We will be banking heavily upon our land-based jet squadrons, which account for almost half of our monthly operating budget.

We are fortunate in that the French air forces have lagged even further behind our own, as we currently own a 100 knot speed advantage over their best jet. We are unfortunate in that once Germany joins the fight its aircraft are equivalent to ours.



Only America has fielded heavy jets of any type, and though we suspect we may have our own first flight tests by the end of the year unless the conflict becomes protracted it is doubtful their deployment will be a factor.

(this slow development of heavy jets is not typical but in this game aircraft have lagged, most likely due to Variable Tech delaying an early key development)

Missile development has been a constant and rapid affair over the later treaty period, however due to our most recent implementations we can hope to possess a significant range advantage having just completed our upgrades to an over horizon capability. However despite this advantage we face an ominous lack of parity. By our best analysis the Marine Nationale has 203 deployed SAM rails and 275 SSMs. We have 108 SSMs and 36 SAMs, but unfortunately all on only the 9 completed hulls of the Audace class;

(note that this is a DD of my design, not one that started from our new art)

(also, though it would have been relevant to display the missile tech branch at this point those details will be released once their presentation is finalized)

Now as was seen by the 1961-1963 Russo/Japanese War missiles are not perfect. The lost Japanese battlecruiser allegedly was sunk by only 4 missiles but reports say up to 12 were fired*. If such hit rates persist into our coming war then we may find that our battleline might have reason to seek to close with the enemy, if the hostile airpower situation permits. All that can be surely known is that it will be a very tenuous affair.

A new draft of a missile cruiser has been sent out for development, however while a dozen of them might well redress part of the existing imbalance it would easily be 10 years before such a program could be accomplished.



It could very well be asked how The Abruzzi could have let matters come to this dire state. We leave it to your Majesty to discern such facts as you see fit.

---

*These numbers are estimates from a broad collection of battles, there is no saved damage log to examine for ships lost in AI v AI wars, only commissioning and moves into and out of Active status.

(I suffered from some tunnel vision as the treaty carried on into its 2nd decade, wondering when I would have more action to document for our many interested parties, and the failure is fully mine. I will now play out the war, and at the very least I will do my best to document how a good-sized battle plays out in the missile age.  I will also try to incorporate further ship details in the war-post.)

[maxnacemit]

I don't see any ASMs on your planes...do I need to look better or are they not a thing in the Regia Marina?

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 21, 2022 0:28:57 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

I don't see any ASMs on your planes...do I need to look better or are they not a thing in the Regia Marina?

ASMs are not listed as part of an aircraft, they are ordnance to add to an aircraft, and so just like bombs and torpedoes you determine their usage during spot before launch.  Air-to-air missiles (short and medium) are considered present on appropriate aircraft and augment both their engagement range and firepower.

[maxnacemit]

Jun 21, 2022 5:58:57 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

Jun 21, 2022 0:28:57 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

I don't see any ASMs on your planes...do I need to look better or are they not a thing in the Regia Marina?

ASMs are not listed as part of an aircraft, they are ordnance to add to an aircraft, and so just like bombs and torpedoes you determine their usage during spot before launch.  Air-to-air missiles (short and medium) are considered present on appropriate aircraft and augment both their engagement range and firepower.

I mean, I don't see the ability to carry them in the load options. And I don't see a cell like what TBs have corresponding to the missiles either...

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 21, 2022 6:06:28 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

Jun 21, 2022 5:58:57 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

ASMs are not listed as part of an aircraft, they are ordnance to add to an aircraft, and so just like bombs and torpedoes you determine their usage during spot before launch.  Air-to-air missiles (short and medium) are considered present on appropriate aircraft and augment both their engagement range and firepower.

I mean, I don't see the ability to carry them in the load options. And I don't see a cell like what TBs have corresponding to the missiles either...

Ah, yes there you are right.  ASMs are treated as Heavy ordnance, but on the battle screen they would be an option to add to any attack aircraft.  I will cover this.

[maxnacemit]

Jun 21, 2022 6:16:36 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

Jun 21, 2022 6:06:28 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

I mean, I don't see the ability to carry them in the load options. And I don't see a cell like what TBs have corresponding to the missiles either...

Ah, yes there you are right.  ASMs are treated as Heavy ordnance, but on the battle screen they would be an option to add to any attack aircraft.  I will cover this.

What determines the type of ASMs to be mounted on a particular aircraft model? And how does aircraft engagement range work?

Regardless, if the Regia Marina has ASMs, I'd increase the number of missile-carrying planes on land bases, give them some JFLs for cover againist enemy CAP and pray.

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 21, 2022 6:52:31 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

Jun 21, 2022 6:16:36 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

Ah, yes there you are right.  ASMs are treated as Heavy ordnance, but on the battle screen they would be an option to add to any attack aircraft.  I will cover this.

What determines the type of ASMs to be mounted on a particular aircraft model? And how does aircraft engagement range work?

Regardless, if the Regia Marina has ASMs, I'd increase the number of missile-carrying planes on land bases, give them some JFLs for cover againist enemy CAP and pray.

LOL  yes, the Holy City will receive many visits, believe me.

As far as ordnance, in the same way ordnance capability for bombs and torpedoes is only 'moved' by tech level, so too are missiles treated; that was the ordnance model in the game system.  Missiles will have an appropriate range for type based on the current tech.  In the same way bombs and torpedoes are 'universal' so too are missiles.  No nation's missile of a type is considered to be grossly different than anothers, and a nation only has one 'model' of a given type in inventory at a time.  The micromanagement to ensure ships would have stocks of different types every time the tech improved would make the colonial cruiser shuffle look like fun, so that's why bombs and torpedoes and now missiles are treated this way in the game.

In an engagement the game will consider techs and determine who has the greater range, attacker or defender, whether MRAAM, SRAAM, ASM, or RocTorp, and this will be based on type and your relative tech.  In an anti-shipping engagement superior range (such as the Over the Horizon capability which I achieved 1 month before the current war) indicates the attack is launched without risk to the attacker.  If the defender has CAP then they could be vectored to intercept beyond the target's SAM umbrella.  MRAAM could engage a target before one with SRAAM, and both types of missiles augment the FP of the intercepting fighter, which number is then compared to the target using the same deter/damage/kill engine as in RTW2.

[maxnacemit]

Jun 21, 2022 11:12:23 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

Jun 21, 2022 6:52:31 GMT -6 maxnacemit said:

What determines the type of ASMs to be mounted on a particular aircraft model? And how does aircraft engagement range work?

Regardless, if the Regia Marina has ASMs, I'd increase the number of missile-carrying planes on land bases, give them some JFLs for cover againist enemy CAP and pray.

LOL  yes, the Holy City will receive many visits, believe me.

As far as ordnance, in the same way ordnance capability for bombs and torpedoes is only 'moved' by tech level, so too are missiles treated; that was the ordnance model in the game system.  Missiles will have an appropriate range for type based on the current tech.  In the same way bombs and torpedoes are 'universal' so too are missiles.  No nation's missile of a type is considered to be grossly different than anothers, and a nation only has one 'model' of a given type in inventory at a time.  The micromanagement to ensure ships would have stocks of different types every time the tech improved would make the colonial cruiser shuffle look like fun, so that's why bombs and torpedoes and now missiles are treated this way in the game.

In an engagement the game will consider techs and determine who has the greater range, attacker or defender, whether MRAAM, SRAAM, ASM, or RocTorp, and this will be based on type and your relative tech.  In an anti-shipping engagement superior range (such as the Over the Horizon capability which I achieved 1 month before the current war) indicates the attack is launched without risk to the attacker.  If the defender has CAP then they could be vectored to intercept beyond the target's SAM umbrella.  MRAAM could engage a target before one with SRAAM, and both types of missiles augment the FP of the intercepting fighter, which number is then compared to the target using the same deter/damage/kill engine as in RTW2.

Thanks for your explanation of the engagement range! I meant "type of ASMs" as "light/medium/heavy", though.