Truck and tank technology

[Borys]

Ahoj!
I will quote what P3D, Ithekro, Maddox and I have been discussing about mobility and tanks. We'd like to hear the suggestions of the well read, intelligent individuals of this board.
Borys

[Borys]

'Tanks and Armored cars 1905' gives:
- Fast brigade/armored cars.
A quick reaction brigade of Armored cars, motorized infantry and motorized artillery
~300 trucks and some artillery
Cost: 1BP $3

Semi-Motorized Infantry: trucks and tractors replacing horse-drawn teams. Infantry is  still leg infantry. Strategically (not Tactically!) more mobile troops - at least where roads are present. Needs Advanced level INF.
Cost: 1BP $5

1910 level
Tank Brigade
able to break through trenchlines
Build cost is 4BP and $10. One single use cost 1BP and $2 (repairs, losses)

Allows researching 1915 Cavalry - semi-motorized cavalry

Futuristic
- Early Cruiser Tank Brigade,
6BP, $12,  1BP and $2 cost for use
Allow researching Futuristic Cavalry - motorized division

[Borys]

Or:

Motorization/Armored Cars 1904
Motorization/Armored Cars 1910
Motorization/Armored Cars 1916

with additional techs:
siege artillery, needs 1904 level
primitive tanks and landships, 1910 motorization required
'Refined' tanks - 1916 motorization required

or:
1912: Primitive Tanks
1916: Improved tanks

[Borys]

Or:
Motorization techs:
1906 - armored cars
gives:
- Siege artillery:
0.5BP and $2 for 10-12 siege Artillery pieces?

- Fast brigade/armored cars.
A quick reaction brigade of Armored cars, motorized infantry and motorized artillery
~300 trucks and some artillery
Cost: 1BP $3

Semi-Motorized Infantry: trucks and tractors replacing horse-drawn teams. Infantry is  still leg infantry. Strategically (not Tactically!) more mobile troops - at least where roads are present. Needs Advanced level INF.
Cost: 1BP $5

1912 - primitive tanks and advanced armored cars,  needed for Cutting Edge Cavalry

Tank Brigade
able to break through trenchlines
Build cost is 4BP and $10. One single use cost 1BP and $2 (repairs, losses)

1916 Motorization
- Early Cruiser Tank Brigade,
6BP, $12,  1BP and $2 cost for use
Needed for Futuristic Cavalry - motorized division

[Borys]

Or:

Motorisation
1906 - early motorisation (trucks issued in limited numbers, ambulances, first armoured cars) - requires +1 Cav?
1912 - reliable armoured cars, HMG fire resistant
1916 - broader motorisation (first truck borne troops&armoured car units) - requeries +3 Cav?
1922 - Blitzkrieg! - requeries lots of things, to be defined later Smiley


Tanks
1906 - artillery tractors - allows mobile 8+ inch artillery
1910 - primitive (breakdown a lot)
1916 - more or less reliable breakthrough tanks
1920 - reliable cruiser  tanks (needed for Blitzkrieg!)

[Tanthalas]

'Tanks and Armored cars 1905' gives:
- Fast brigade/armored cars.
A quick reaction brigade of Armored cars, motorized infantry and motorized artillery
~300 trucks and some artillery
Cost: 1BP $3

Semi-Motorized Infantry: trucks and tractors replacing horse-drawn teams. Infantry is  still leg infantry. Strategically (not Tactically!) more mobile troops - at least where roads are present. Needs Advanced level INF.
Cost: 1BP $5

1910 level
Tank Brigade
able to break through trenchlines
Build cost is 4BP and $10. One single use cost 1BP and $2 (repairs, losses)

Allows researching 1915 Cavalry - semi-motorized cavalry

Futuristic
- Early Cruiser Tank Brigade,
6BP, $12,  1BP and $2 cost for use
Allow researching Futuristic Cavalry - motorized division

Honestly this looks the best to me, it offers the most flexibility to individual players to sort out how they want to run their military.

[Borys]

Ahoj!
Any suggestions?
Any alternatives to what we have hatched?
Borys

[The Rock Doctor]

I don't think I'd want to see tank/armored car technology substantially ahead of ~historical without a major land war to trigger the development (especially the tank).  The Second Pacific War was not that war.

I'm also not sure I'd want to see too many new techs added - a single "mechanization/motorization tech" should suffice, if it isn't just tacked onto the normal infantry/cavalry techs.

But that's just me being a stick in the mud.

[Carthaginian]

Or:
Motorization techs:
1906 - armored cars
gives:
- Siege artillery:
0.5BP and $2 for 10-12 siege Artillery pieces?

- Fast brigade/armored cars.
A quick reaction brigade of Armored cars, motorized infantry and motorized artillery
~300 trucks and some artillery
Cost: 1BP $3

Semi-Motorized Infantry: trucks and tractors replacing horse-drawn teams. Infantry is  still leg infantry. Strategically (not Tactically!) more mobile troops - at least where roads are present. Needs Advanced level INF.
Cost: 1BP $5

1912 - primitive tanks and advanced armored cars,  needed for Cutting Edge Cavalry

Tank Brigade
able to break through trenchlines
Build cost is 4BP and $10. One single use cost 1BP and $2 (repairs, losses)

1916 Motorization
- Early Cruiser Tank Brigade,
6BP, $12,  1BP and $2 cost for use
Needed for Futuristic Cavalry - motorized division

I'm with this choice... seems to represent a good compromise between what happened in OTL and what is available in N-verse now.

[Carthaginian]

I don't think I'd want to see tank/armored car technology substantially ahead of ~historical without a major land war to trigger the development (especially the tank).  The Second Pacific War was not that war.

I'm also not sure I'd want to see too many new techs added - a single "mechanization/motorization tech" should suffice, if it isn't just tacked onto the normal infantry/cavalry techs.

But that's just me being a stick in the mud.

Well, by the mid 20's, Rock, armor becomes cavalry.
At that point, the two tech trees merge, and you just cease to use horses, replacing them with motorized transport.

Also, nations like the CSA, Rohan, and some African states have the large, open spaces that would naturally demand rapid, reliable troop transport using mechanized forces as the tech matured. No land war called for- it can be a natural progression of "if a truck can move 12 troops 300 miles in a day for $800, where it takes $600 worth of horses 5 days... which is REALLY more cost effective?" By 1909, you're starting to get into the truck's domain. By 1913- when a Model T flatbed cost $440- you've solidly knocked the horse out of most environments; only high mountains, dense forests/jungles and deserts are left to the horse. Any large-scale troop movements are simply going to start being conducted by motorized means by economic considerations.

Armored cars, and then tanks, would also come as a natural development of this. If troops start getting moved by truck, you'll need something as fast to catch them- so you stick a machine gun on another truck. That truck gets shot at by the troops it's attacking, so armor plate gets bolted on. Since you need something to defend your transports from this new armored menace, a heavier armored vehicle is built with a more power ful gun to defeat the armor...

In the words of Eddie Vedder:
"It's Evolution, Baby!"

[Borys]

IMO any sort of mass motirisation is the 1920s. If not 1930s.
There were not enough RELIABLE trucks available, nor roads for them, nor people to operate and maintain them, nor the industries to keep them supplied, etc., etc.
Borys

[Ithekro]

Rohan has been trying to come up with something since the end of the Anahuac War were horse cavalry still worked, but the repeating guns started to take their toll on the riders and their mounts.  For a nation that has based its military might on the horse for so long, the Army expects to maintain its mobility and speed of the charge.  Thus they have been looking into two things: One type to support the infantry and another to support/supplant the cavalry.  (What these will end up being is still being debated:  my thoughts on the matter come from William R Forstchen's "Lost Regiment" novels)

[Carthaginian]

IMO any sort of mass motirisation is the 1920s. If not 1930s.
There were not enough RELIABLE trucks available, nor roads for them, nor people to operate and maintain them, nor the industries to keep them supplied, etc., etc.
Borys

Parisian cabs, Borys... Parisian cabs. ;)
1914 tech can easily get away with mass mobilization by vehicle- you just can't expect them to be durable enough for COMBAT use. THAT is the domain of 1920's tech, I'll agree- but we are starting to approach that mark, and our thoughts are shifting towards the development of that school of thought. To reach it, we must first prove the concept sound, and to do THAT, we must first make use of the tech at hand in a convincing way.

Seriously- if a truck can transport more troops faster than an equivalent $$$ amount of horses, an army will start looking at using the trucks. Along the CSA's rail network, stops already exist for trains, building them up to serve as way stations for military truck convoys is as simple as moving out a couple of flatcars loaded with fuel tanks, and a couple of tank cars loaded with fuel. After that, all a convoy initially need do is follow the railroad's right of way (crossing trestle bridges as necessary, bumpy but very doable *experience speaks*) to get between them. This would enable truck mounted troops to make much better time overland than horse mounted units.

In time, a road will develop alongside the track (historically proven) almost of it's own accord- though development will be required eventually to allow civilian traffic (about 1920's).


Also, I STRONGLY disagree on the 'industry' comment. The Model T was reliable by 1909 and mass market available by the 1913.
http://www.modelt.org/tprices.html
They were also cheaper than enough horses to transport an equivalent number of men by 1915. Remember, you have to buy the horse ($40-50), the tack, and the feed (not always good grazing). The Model T was actually cheaper to feed and maintain as long as they kept in decent working order. They were not expensive to fix... they were actually rather durable, with most problems fixable by local blacksmiths unless they were engine problems (suspension, body, etc). Military units, however, would take parts with them- also very available from Ford if ordered in advance and carried as a store of supplies. This means that even engine problems would cause only minimum delay and discomfort to such a unit. Though it is hard, there is little that can go wrong with those old engines that cannot be fixed in a day's hard work. Even replacing something like a crankshaft or piston would be doable in a day (though a new engine would likely be substituted)... and the day after that, you'd still make at least 3x the distance that horses could.

[Tanthalas]

I tend to agree

[Korpen]

I think i agree with Rocky.
I do not really see much need for an independent tech in this are at this point in time.
In the beginning of ww1 the French army hade less the 300 vehicles of all types, and no other army really hade much more then that. Until post ww1, I think a motorised unit would not be able to move any faster or further then a horse-drawn unit as the top speed of most truck loaded was often less then 8km/h. The only advantage of motorisation was the ability to pull heavy pieces in a single load, allowing more heavy artillery in the field.
In fact, lots of trucks would slow the unit down on both the tactical and strategic lever. On the tactical level due to the fact that truck had much worse off-road capability then horse teams, and strategically as they were trickier to load on to trains. This possibly leaves a slight advantage on the operational level.

Motorisation may make an impact at army or corp. level supply, but as we do not really have any rules for that atm...