Would like to join, if I may

[damocles]

Welcome! If you want some help with springsharp, I am more then happy to lend my experience, however limited it may be compared to some of the members here.

I'm learning a lot from simming historical ships, and developing my own - entirely irrational - likes and dislikes. For some reason, I've become very fond of the RN-style raised forecastle, rather than the flush hull which SS seems to prefer.

Smashed bows and a poor turning circle?  

The Iberian Crusaders are always looking for new victi....  I mean new nations to have relations with.

The cruellest fate for a warship is to die in the breaker's yard. If I build a navy, I want to use it. As the Navy say, all we ask for is a willing foe and sea room.

There is that, but beware for what you wish. Watch 3 game years effort evaporate in a one month game turn.  

Welcome to the game!  Feel free to ask questions.

As Guinness said we are in a low right now.  We had medium / small war fought in Africa and a large one is being fought in China so this is sucking some of the air out of the game right now.  Now my own thought is this is a good time for a new person looking to join.  As you can get up to speed without any real time pressure.

Yeah, it seems to be that way. I was wondering if I should be cheeky and ask to poach Gran Colombia, but that might be a little too much like jumping in at the deep end.

No comment on this. Not my place. 

Regarding the China war, given that this is a Naval sim, surely a land war can be hand-waved. "There are several years of war. Millions die. The richer country wins. The end. Let's skip to the part where fleet actions are involved." Or am I missing out on something?

I'm part of the other half of that war. There is a deadly air/sea component going on that Logi and I fight that looks nothing like WW I Europe or Jutland. I was rendered hors de combat in  real life, so September/October is a little confused in the presents right now, but the intent is there to make the naval lessons learned radically different from WW I or from what is presumed to lead to aircraft carriers in the 1930s. Right now the Dutch and the MK have learned that air-power HURTS. Battleships in the East China Sea, pfui.                                    

victims...im close to you...and im tiny...(starts loading mines onto ships)

Assymmetrical warfare is something to be admired on land, but at sea, one should be chivalrous.

Not after Qungdao. No quarter. War at sea, Chinese style is rather bitter and attritional.

Yes, players are munckins :)

Ahoj! You're preaching to the choir. I'm so used to forcing players to be at least slightly fluffy, that when I'm not GMming, I end up being absurdly non-optimal. Most of my Springsharp designs have freeboards divisible by 7 feet, for instance, because there's nothing worse than a ship not evenly divisible into decks.

Its 9 feet I think. Plumbing and overhead framing.

And yes - there is no Washington Treaty. There was an attempt at one, but it was  boycotted by several major nations.
However, economics should cap battleships at around 45K tonnes.

I wasn't planning on building 1920-tech SHBBs (fun though the idea is...). I've always had a soft spot for treaty cruisers - those ridiculously overpowered CAs, carefully minmaxed to get them under the tonnage threshold - and am slightly disappointed that, absurd as they were, they aren't playing a part in the N-verse.

Not practical with our current engine and gun limits. I think 4000-7000 tonne frigates will be more useful you will find than the Washington cruisers. ikmbers matter.      

Also, IMHO, historically the Washington Treaty, and especially the later London treaty, were massively important in redirecting people into CV research. Without it, the whole carrier vs battleship aspect of the pacific war may not have occurred, and we might have battlewagons to this day.

Not likely. The China war seems to show torpedo warfare is a lot deadlier than even I expected.

But you joined in at a ripe time, lots of time for you to catch up and get accustomed to the sim, it's been going a lot slower, courtesy of moi and the Chinese War of Unification.

China has one of those every century or so, don't they? Just like Spain has a civil war every century in OTL.

What war of unification? War of RRC aggression you mean.

Remedy with tinkering with the beam and Bc values. But I note, careful about the space constraints of a ship, something SS doesn't always address.

Stuff grows to fill the space available, as Parkinson might have said had he been an engineer and not a bureaucrat. I tend to put in 80-200 tons misc to anything CA or bigger, and avoid "cramped" space, just because I don't want to be designing to the simulation rather than the world the simulation is attempting to simulate.

Pay careful attention to the rules about EW systems and electronics in general 150 tons for FC ruins many a design and balloons it past your planned build limit.  

I don't know if that last sentence made sense.

It did. See my reply.

As for the leaders of tech, the line is something blurred due to technological trading that is widespread within the N-Verse. The leaders do not lead by much, the rest tail somewhat closely behind, but there are a few nations that are very backwards in terms of technology.

So if I jump in with 1920-style stuff, I won't be laughed out of court?

See the current tanks discussions. Historical is close but NOT parallel in the Nverse. Not everyone can afford everything. For example Holland lags badly in AAA but currently is well ahead in torpedo tech over many in the Nverse.  

I'm looking through what the fleets here have, incidentally, and *christ*, the N-verse has a high average speed. Or is that a misperception?

That is not a mis-perception. The Dutch tended to build battlecruisers when I got them and I am stuck with a BC fleet, though my own predilection is for firepower and armor. I love torpedoes.   

As for the naval inclinations. I find the world split into European and Pacific fleets. The European is geared towards very large ships, heavy firepower, armor, low speed. The Pacific generally runs in a sort of battlecruiser world with the occasionally overgrown cruiser through in.

Pacific sounds a lot more fun, then.

Unless you happen to be the Dutch and have to split the difference.

[Laertes]

China War: This has already settled down to be the Nverse equivalent of the World War 1, at least a lot of us see it that way. Most Nverse wars last only 6 months, and we haven't really had trench warfare on a large scale until now. So it's somewhat important, I think, for the development of our timeline in the future. It is a naval sim, but there are lots of Army enthusiasts here too. Also, unlike Wesworld, we do sim battles and whole wars instead of simply scripting them, though I hope to get the Chinese war under control in the future by at least partially scripting it just to keep things moving.

Perhaps it's a difference in GMming style. I personally would have asked each player, once each year, "What is your doctrine for this coming year?", and played it out accordingly. That's frighteningly similar to what actually happened in OTL in WW1, anyway - people deploying brand-new doctrines with no concept of how they'll fare, except a game-theoretic prediction of what the other guy will do. But it's nice to be a player for once, and not to have to worry.

Re Army enthusiasts: I am one, but I'm going cold turkey here. I know if I so much as get a sniff of land units, I'll be writing TO&Es down to platoon level, so I'm not even going to touch it. Better to kick the habit.

Available nations: GC might certainly end up being among the choices, but most of the time we prefer to start new players in something smaller* at least until they've cut their teeth on the ruleset and Nverse history, etc. You did arrive at a good time in this regard, as we're already working on reseeding players as it were.

Fine with me.

Tech and ship conventions: We have somewhat delayed the rise of the aircraft as a weapon of war, due to it's lack of exercise. However, both of 1919's wars have seen significant use of aircraft, so I expect that aircraft development will now logically pick up in the Nverse. It is in anticipation of that that we're recasting the rules for aircraft acquisition and maintenance starting in 1920. There is an aircraft carrier tech which governs when a flat decked carrier can be developed, etc. As far as speed is concerned: without the Royal Navy around to drive so much convention in our universe, many prevailing ship attributes are somewhat different here. Some types tend to be slower than expected, some faster. Also, unlike OTL 1920, "cruisers" are all over the map, including some very large, very fast "light battlecruisers", which several of us have tinkered with. I personally am quite looking forward to some of those concepts being tested in (simulated) battle.

Fantastic! One thing I really dislike about many games is how often a strongly-dominant strategy emerges. The fact that technology is all over the place is a strong indication that this hasn't happened.

Although, perhaps it's also a symptom of prolonged peace. We had the same thing in OTL between the world wars - loads of theories, loads of builds, absolutely no idea of what would actually work and what wouldn't.

When one has a navy limited to 5 surface units over 500 tons, one needs as many force multipliers as possible.

Then you may want to find a big friend to hide behind. And by hide behind, I mean guarantee your independence. And by guarantee your independence, I mean, "Here, Mr Big Guy, I didn't want to run my own foreign policy anyway."

No, OTL it had a continuous civil war for a whole century. Chinese Civil Wars don't come often, but when it happens, it is very very bloody. The OTL Civil War was longer due to the relative power and number of factions involved.

The only thing I know about Chinese history comes from that fact that everybody chips away that them constantly, presumably because they get too much Badboy if they try to conquer it all at once.

Depends on what you are bring up, but should not.

8x12", 23.6kt light, 12000@16kts, 24kt top speed, 12" armour? (It's what I'm playing with right now, trying to spend the last few scraps of composite strength efficiently.)

You are probably looking at Pacific ships.

As I said, fast battlecruiser warfare interests me more than slow line fighting.

I think by the end of this war, Ireland's population will have died at least once. My army has already been killed several times over!

Voodoo infantry is the way to go.

Smashed bows and a poor turning circle? 

That was it. Also, irrationally high seakeeping numbers. I have difficulty *not* getting a comment about it.

I'm part of the other half of that war. There is a deadly air/sea component going on that Logi and I fight that looks nothing like WW I Europe or Jutland. I was rendered hors de combat in  real life, so September/October is a little confused in the presents, but the intent is there to make the naval lessons learned radically different from WW I or from what is presumed to lead to aircraft carriers in the 1930s. Right now the Dutch and the MK have learned that air-power HURTS. Battleships in the East China Sea, pfui.

Looking at my map of the East China Sea, most of it seems coverable by land-based planes. That doesn't mean much - the carrier port-strike doctrine was invented in the Med, after all - but it might lead to a base-control doctrine rather than a carrier-strike one.

9 feet. Plumbing and overhead framing.

I'm over six foot, and I duck under those things when I visit historical warships. If you have them concealed above the ceiling, your ships are more luxurious than the RN was.

Not likely. The China war seems to show torpedo warfare is a lot deadlier than expected.

Oh dear. I quite like big gunships, and the thought of coming in just to see their slow decline in favour of submarines and torpedo bombers is rather disappointing.

See the current tanks discussions. Historical is close but NOT parallel in the Nverse. Not everyone can afford everything. For example Holland lags badly in AAA but currently is well ahead in torpedo tech over many in the Nverse. 

Must... not... tank... fanboy... *twitch* *twitch*

That is not a misperception. The Dutch tended to build battlecruisers when I got them and I am stuck with a BC fleet though my own predilection is for firepower and armor.     

I'll buy the BCs off you.

[snip]

victims...im close to you...and im tiny...(starts loading mines onto ships)

Assymmetrical warfare is something to be admired on land, but at sea, one should be chivalrous.

Not after Qungdao. No quarter. War at sea, Chinese style is rather bitter and attritional.

That was me, your little whiskey-drinking island.

When one has a navy limited to 5 surface units over 500 tons, one needs as many force multipliers as possible.

Then you may want to find a big friend to hide behind. And by hide behind, I mean guarantee your independence. And by guarantee your independence, I mean, "Here, Mr Big Guy, I didn't want to run my own foreign policy anyway."

(attempts to hide submarines behind back) bring your battleline to a time and place of my choosing! also, those 5 might not be alone for much longer...

[Jefgte]

Welcome aboard Laertes.

Welcome from the Naciones del Sur America (NUS).

& .....Good luck for your futur Fleet  ;)


What country for our new Player ?



Jef

[Laertes]

Welcome aboard Laertes.

Welcome from the Naciones del Sur America (NUS).

& .....Good luck for your futur Fleet  Wink

Thank you very much.

What country for our new Player ?

I was hoping for something where I can build more or less from scratch, rather than having legacy issues. The idea of an emerging power - like Japan in early-20th century OTL, or China nowadays - is appealing.

[Jefgte]

...rather than having legacy issues....

Normaly the fleet built by your predecessor is not crazy, you have just some personnal adjustements to made.

That is also cool & sometime difficult to rework a existing Fleet.


Jef

[Logi]

The only thing I know about Chinese history comes from that fact that everybody chips away that them constantly, presumably because they get too much Badboy if they try to conquer it all at once.

Paradox games are quite skewed against the Chinese Empire. They always get to be the butt of everything except for their number of provinces.

I haven't heard of such a strategy, though I tend to chip off France constantly. It's more of trying to keep their strength and ridiculous manpower down.

[Laertes]

Paradox games are quite skewed against the Chinese Empire. They always get to be the butt of everything except for their number of provinces.

In Victoria 1, China was one of the easiest uncivs to win with. She has lots of raw materials, and you *never* run short of pops. If one plays well and tech-trades like a mofo, she can usually end up not only top 8, but comfortably ahead of UK, US and Germany. I hope they make it a bit harder in Vic 2; I've not played that yet.

In HoI2, China was great fun. Japan sends wave upon wave of superior forces at you, and you trade space for time while sending millions of teenagers to their deaths. If that doesn't make you feel like Commissar Yarrick, nothing will. HoI3 China is let down by the (infamous) Japanese supply bug. It's not that you win the war easily, it's that there is no war. It's a letdown.

[Logi]

My bad, wrong series. I was talking about the Europa Universalis series, which as far as I know, is the only to use the term Bad Boy. The HoI series use belligerence instead. I haven't played the Victoria series yet.

In HoI 2, playing spamming militia is certainly the easiest way to defeat Japan, but I find it much more fun and interesting to use infantry and other generally higher tech units to win the battle. And yes, Nationalist China is IMO the most fun nation to play in HoI 2. It trumps Germany simply because one doesn't have Allied Bombers constantly bombing your factories during your war.

[Laertes]

My bad, wrong series. I was talking about the Europa Universalis series, which as far as I know, is the only to use the term Bad Boy. The HoI series use belligerence instead. I haven't played the Victoria series yet.

Badboy is the generic term used on the forums; Victoria doesn't have it explicitly displayed, but it's a very real number within the game code. (And can be displayed using the console.) Victoria 2 calls it Infamy.

Whatever you call it, it's the same basic idea.

HoI3 has quite an interesting treatment of it, in which it's called Threat. Every country has a Neutrality rating, and the ratio between the highest Threat in the world and your Neutrality indicates how much you can begin to prepare for war - entering alliances, gearing up your economy, mobilising reserves, etc. Typically for HoI3, it's a good idea, well implemented, and not really ever used.*

The Victoria games are my favourite, to be honest. More detailed than the EU series, and not as purely military as the HoI ones.

In HoI 2, playing spamming militia is certainly the easiest way to defeat Japan, but I find it much more fun and interesting to use infantry and other generally higher tech units to win the battle. And yes, Nationalist China is IMO the most fun nation to play in HoI 2. It trumps Germany simply because one doesn't have Allied Bombers constantly bombing your factories during your war.

If one's using CORE or a similar mod, then spammed militia just won't cut it. Sure, given good defensive terrain like the Yellow River line, they can stop anything short of a major, high-tech, multi-corps attack. But those will come. Militia can't fight combined arms armour and aircraft - for that, you need Inf at the least.

Speaking of massive, bloody Chinese wars, is there a thread of the N-verse one somewhere I can read?

---

*Actually, there are two types of things which are typical for that game. The other type is a good idea, badly implemented, which renders certain situations nigh-unplayable.

[Logi]

Yes, I just refer to different terms for each game. Bad Boy was changed in the Europa series to Infamy, my bad. I fully intend on getting the Victoria 2 soon, I did like how it looked.

Speaking of massive, bloody Chinese wars, is there a thread of the N-verse one somewhere I can read?

http://www.navalism.org/index.php?topic=5187.0

[Ithekro]

Can I recommend one of the Asian Indian as a new location of a fleet power?   This would place one bewteen the Pacific and Euopean powers on theirmain route to each other's regions.

This is also because if I remember correctly the remaining open American powers are large (Gran Columbia and the United Norman Kingoms)  Both of which could use players I suppose.

[Valles]

I don't know about 'European' and 'Pacific' fleet schools in the literal sense - Rohan and Maoria are both powers, greater and lesser, in the Pacific relying on slow battle lines, while the Dutch hot-rod fleet are, IIRC, all actually built in Europe proper - but as labels go they're at least close enough for hand grenades, and lord knows there does seem to be a real philosophical dichotomy there, so let's go with that.

And I've always approached the game from a kind of half-Risk-half-retro-sci-fi perspective, so, depending how serious you are about avoiding temptation re: the tank thread, I may or may not have cookies to offer.

[Laertes]

Can I recommend one of the Asian Indian as a new location of a fleet power?   This would place one bewteen the Pacific and Euopean powers on theirmain route to each other's regions.

Actually, that would be cool. Partly because of the location, and partly because then I can assign unpronounceable Tamil names to my ships.

And I've always approached the game from a kind of half-Risk-half-retro-sci-fi perspective, so, depending how serious you are about avoiding temptation re: the tank thread, I may or may not have cookies to offer.

I think I might get too heavily into the roleplaying of proponents of what were, historically, deadend tech trees...

Which is to say, it's too late, I've already gotten too heavily into said mindset. Alas. The TKS looms inevitably on the horizon.

[Borys]

Ahoj!
The TKS could evolve into an universal carrier.
Borys