Nationbuilding Setup Proposal

[snip]

See the attached document and add any feedback to this thread.

[olekit24]

What is Land points and Deployment poinst? Have not found any definition...

[snip]

Read the document posted under the Ruleset Revision thread

[Jefgte]

Each nation will start with 480 BP of naval ships and infrastructure.Ships constructed
have their costs modified as shown below. It is expected that players will make a
reasonable effort to spread the number of hulls constructed over the whole of the time
period in question.
○ Pre 1895: 60%
○ 1895-1900: 75%
○ 1901-1907: 90%
○ 1908-1909: 100%

It is expected that players will make areasonable effort to spread the number of hulls constructed over the whole of the time
period in question.

Is there a max BP % fixed for each period ?

ex: Total BP fleet => 100%
1890-1895 => 20%
1895-1900 => 20%
1901-1907 => 40%
1908-1909 => 20%

[snip]

There is not a BP max or min. As stated in the document, try and keep the number of hulls distributed across the whole of the period.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I've put a lot of time into trying to get a consistent number of hulls. I was actually just writing this up for my own post.
There's a couple of problems.
The first of course is turbines- and other technology, the ships post 1904 are much more desirable.
The second is time.... say 1889-1894 is 6 years, 1895-1900 is 6 years, 1901-1907...7years, 1908-09...2 years.   Odd to cram 7 years of building hulls into 2 years.
The third is that a hull can be 12000 tons in 1894 and 20000 tons in 1907... you should have less later.

For Hulls, I'm excluding Torpedo Boats and MTBs:

1889-1894 : 38
1895-1900 : 38
1901-1907 : 52 - which seems a big spike
1908-1909 : 16  -which makes 1908 look way shy
                   -----
                   144
So, what I've found myself doing is hulls/ year.

For me that's looking like :
1889-1894 : 6.3
1895-1900 : 6.3
1901-1907 : 7.4
1908-1909 : 8

Now, if anything 08-9 is the spike, That last number is easy to adjust up and down by building fewer 750t destroyers. Likewise if I need to drop the 01-07 52 hulls number, I just won't build   either some 500t DDs or some 250t Minesweepers, because I want to build my protected cruisers in this time frame.

[Walter]

Well, it really depends on what is happening with the spikes. There is a difference between building twenty 500 ton destroyers and one 10,000 ton armored cruiser or between thirty 750 ton destroyers and one 22,500 ton battleship. Also what is happening in 1909? It is possible that there are some ships laid down in 1909 that are still under construction at the end of the year that causes the 08-9 spike when looking at the years individually.

Personally I would look at tonnages. Using your 08-9 hulls per year, it is extremely easy to work on eight 750 ton destroyers per year but it is impossible to properly work on eight 25,000 ton battleships per year as they require 35 BPs per half year. The best you could probably do with our startup values is 5-6 25,000 ton battleships per year without any other types of ships.

[Jefgte]

Walter explain better than mee the problems.

We could add in the rules,
"1 class per year & class must be alterned".
Ships under 250t could be built simultaneously as other class.

ex:
...
1894 : DD
1895: SC
1896: AC
1897: BB
...

Like I made in my building Plan.

Jef

[Kaiser Kirk]

Well, it really depends on what is happening with the spikes. There is a difference between building twenty 500 ton destroyers and one 10,000 ton armored cruiser or between thirty 750 ton destroyers and one 22,500 ton battleship. Also what is happening in 1909? It is possible that there are some ships laid down in 1909 that are still under construction at the end of the year that causes the 08-9 spike when looking at the years individually.

Yep there's ships still building at the end of 1909, I'm counting those hulls. But 1909 isn't the spike, 1901-1907 is, and that's due to a bunch of destroyers and minesweepers.

Personally I would look at tonnages. Using your 08-9 hulls per year, it is extremely easy to work on eight 750 ton destroyers per year but it is impossible to properly work on eight 25,000 ton battleships per year as they require 35 BPs per half year. The best you could probably do with our startup values is 5-6 25,000 ton battleships per year without any other types of ships.

No no no.  I asked specifically if we were to average tonnages out, and Snip has repeatedly gone with hulls.  Further, that's why I specifically checked if simplifiying things and having all class dates of all 1894, 1900, 1907, 1909 tonnages (which I'm not winding up doing because of tech) was ok - as the BP in those years would have been way beyond what could be produced that year.   We are not bound to a BP amount per year, we ARE bound to hulls - Snip just posted : 

There is not a BP max or min. As stated in the document, try and keep the number of hulls distributed across the whole of the period.

[snip]

To further clarify here, the hull numbers dont need to be exact between given periods but should be closeish. Im also not as worried about the overall hull number as I am about the numbers for given types as defined in the rules (eg, if you try and pile all your Destroyers into 1906+, we will have a problem, while having a couple more hulls post-1906 than pre-1906 is not). I'm intentionally trying to avoid hard limits so as to allow for some construction freedom. If we end up needing some sort of hard limits, Im open to adding them later.

[Kaiser Kirk]

Im also not as worried about the overall hull number as I am about the numbers for given types as defined in the rules

With all due respect, shortly after I finish figuring out my builds is not when I like to see a change in what's required. Hulls and Types of Hulls are different things.

[snip]

Its my fault for not being clear. My apologies.

[Walter]

To further clarify here, the hull numbers dont need to be exact between given periods but should be closeish.

Between periods... To me the issue with that is that you have only 2 years for 1908-9 compared to 7 years for 1901-7, 6 years for 1895-1900 and many, many years for <1895. Ships become bigger and bigger as well in the 1895-1909 time period. It is a lot easier to build ten 10,000 ton battleships and armored cruisers <1895 or 1895-1900 but a lot harder to build ten 20,000 ton battleships and battlecruisers in 1908-9.

The Royal Navy is a good example. Looking at wiki, these are the numbers of battleships, battlecruisers and armored cruisers per class laid down between 1889 and 1909 (with 1889-1894 representing the <1895 category we have being a 6 year period like 1895-1900) and for simplicity assuming that all ships were laid down in the year of the first ship to be laid down of that class unless the ships of the classes were laid down 1910 or later (after all, we do not include 1909> ships in our numbers either)...

1889-1894 (20 ships, average 3.33 ships per year)
8x Royal Sovereign class BBs
3x Centurion class BBs
9x Majestic class BBs

1895-1900 (40 ships, average 6.67 ships per year)
6x Canopus class BBs
8x Formidable class BBs
6x Duncan class BBs
6x Cressy-class ACs
4x Drake-class ACs
10x Monmouth-class ACs

1901-1907 (37 ships, average 5.29 ships per year)
8x King Edward VII class BBs
2x Swiftsure class BBs
2x Lord Nelson class BBs
1x Dreadnought BB
3x Bellerophon class BBs
3x Invincible class BC
3x St. Vincent class BBs
6x Devonshire-class ACs
2x Duke of Edinburgh-class ACs
4x Warrior-class ACs
3x Minotaur-class

1908-1909 (6 ships, average 3 ships per year)
1x Neptune BB
2x Colossus class BBs
1x Orion class BB
1x Indefatigable class BC
1x Lion class BC


... so based on the hulls needing to be closeish spread between the given periods, the RN should have laid between 20 and 40 battleships, battlecruisers and armored cruisers in the 1908-9 period (though looking at the 1895-1900 and 1901-1907 periods 35-40 would be much more realistic as being 'closeish')... but seeing how short a period 2 years is, I am not at all surprised that they did not. They build more than six times the amount of BBs/BCs/ACs in the 1901-1907 period.

Even if you were to make it into a 6 year period by multiplying those 6 ships by 3, you'd end up with 18 ships which is still less than half the number of ships for the 1895-1900 and 1901-1907 periods.

Hulls overall like Kirk is doable and is something that can be realistically achieved. Hulls per given types as defined in the rules... not so much... If Britain, one of the most powerful nation in that time period if not the most powerful nation in that time period, could not get anywhere near 'closeish' with the number of hulls per period (especially the 1908-9 period), then does it make any sense that we do it? To me it does not.

[snip]

What I want out of this is to make sure we have a natural spread of the ships in service over the whole of the pre-start period. What I don't want to have happen is a nation that has a bunch of modern 750t+ Destroyers and no older ones. However, I do want to stay away from hard limits unless its strictly necessary. If you guys have better thoughts on handling this, Im open to hearing them

[Walter]

I understand that but you are looking at it from the 1908-9 period. I am looking at it from the <1895 period. With 'closeish' I read that if my ship type per the rules has 20-40 ships in the <1895 period, 20-40 ships in the 1895-1900 period and 20-40 ships in the 1901-1907 period, I then must have 20-40 ships in the 1908-1909 period as well. With 'closeish', Britain should have laid down between 20 and 40 battleships, battlecruisers and armored cruisers in the 1908-1909 period... but they did not.