Ahoj!
I am getting round to my 1/1917 budget. I have been out of the loop a bit ....
Some questions:
- are army upkeep costs as they were? There seems to had been lots of talk of revision ...
- any population growth?

Kick me in the right direction, please ...
Borys

No population growth until 1/1/1918.  There's an issue of Bharati refugees, but the Mods haven't had time to sort that out.  Most likely, they just aren't settled enough to contribute to national economies until 1918.

We will be going to new army maintenance costs, as nearly everybody voted for in a poll on the Army Board.

FYI: I just updated the Army upkeep table in the rules. Those values are for corps. Please divide by 2 for a division, and by 4 for a brigade.

What we haven't yet adopted is the capability to support more complex constructions as detailed in that thread by miketr. This doesn't mean we won't adopt them, merely that we have not yet fully considered all those ideas.

Thank you, Guinness. Now I can afford to build myself swarms of airfields and airplanes.  :D
The lack of a greedy and sarcastic face continues to hurt.

Im still not exactly sure this reduction in costs is a good idea... Rohans army just got realy realy cheep.

Lets me actually expand. So lets say it was good for small players, bad for large. New Zion just got a shot in the arm...

It saves Gran Colombia around eight bucks or so a half-year, which I can invest in things like Indochinese junk heaps.

For those of us with Very Large Colonial Empires to protect its allowed us some wiggle room.

As an example I can now afford to start building ships and actually moving some Military $$$ to Civilian Economy.

But Since all my tech and the price reductions came together at the same time its saving Italia about $10 per HY.

My hangup is Nations like Rohan which had very large armies to start with can basicly double the size of them for no aditional cost... so Rohan can now afford to expand the army to REALY massive size.  I never realy liked that this switch would enable that (I voted against it btw)

But can you double your army and still MOBILIZE the whole thing and afford it while still building/repairing ships?

Quote from: Sachmle on September 29, 2009, 08:42:27 PM
But can you double your army and still MOBILIZE the whole thing and afford it while still building/repairing ships?

Yup, I always had that ability.... Ithekro had a big army but it was inteligently built.

The change will not effect my Army's size, it was already designed to be about the maximum size, and is at 5% of population.  However, in a war all I could do was afford to mobilize it and feed it ammo, which I have the BP to make.  A nice combo and works for a nearly landlocked nation. The small navy really matters little.

In the long run, my army won't expand, it will improve in quality and I may indulge in some brigade sized forts.  The additional monies will go to fund military infrastructure and a more capable navy & airforce. 

Adding just a few key forts can drain the excess money for a while. $20 a pop.

The problem with forts, for me, is the huge # of folks it takes to garrison them.  Expensive, immobile, and tie up folks that can be used elsewhere.  Rather have 10 brigade-citadels at chokepoints or 50,000 mobile men, than a 50,000 man fort at one chokepoint. 

When I was updating Bavaria, I didn't have the personnel to man a Navy, or the tech to make a worthwhile one, and my army was smaller than the neighbors. All of which left an excess of military $, so I left large chunks of the army active and mobilized and sunk large sums into 2 fortified lines on the Italia border, dumped more into the civilian world. Let tons of BP go to waste. Nothing to spend it on and no means to save it.

I would have built Ammo With it :)

Charles