WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by alt_naval
Just use money!
=simple
Iron -steel-oil etc. = money

and Springsharp already accounts for it and benchmarked against existing ships.

Cheers.

I think I agree that this is the most ideal proposal for a future game.

The cost issue is one of the big things which hurts our lack of sloops, IMHO. For instance, one of the Irish Shannon-class sloops will will run 1,110 tons, only 600 tons less than an Irish Province-class destroyer... but in cost, the Shannon is £0.48 million while a Province-class is £1.27 million. 37% of the cost, 2/3rds of the weight. Big difference for my budget!

Add to that, the sloop probably doesn't need the high level of tech the Destroyer does - no electric welding, high pressure boilers etc. so could be built by a less competent yard.

To illustrate my point on yard tech, contrast RN, KM and USN destroyers in the 1930's. US steadily improved their DD machinery, KM picked something ahead of its time and couldn't iron out the problems, RN plodded on with 1920's reliability. The RN didn't catch the USN until the post war Darings.

Cheers,

Quoted

Originally posted by alt_naval
Just use money!
=simple
Iron -steel-oil etc. = money

and Springsharp already accounts for it and benchmarked against existing ships.

Cheers.

Money is acceptable, there are some questions that would have to be addressed.

However if I had a choice between money and resources, I would take the resources.

The amount of goods you have to actually build stuff out of is a harder limit. Ensuring you have access to the critical materials to build your ships and run your country is important.

However I'd be willing to do both.

I'd choose money over resources.

As has been said how can the total amount be determined, you need a finite total you can mine out or have access too.

Money can be made and spent, afterall its money, not resources, that has largely curtailed production (in peacetime anyway). money would help the maintainence problem too.

We need to decide whether we want an RPG or a naval construction sim. We began as the latter but now RPG seems to be taking over. Who wants the hassle of selling iron and steel every qaurter?

I don't use spread sheets, I have my build times for every class and the tonnage needed on a word file and just go from their and do the maths with a calculator.

Same here, I have little patience for spreadsheets and I only used one for a long term building plan given the number of ships laid down and the tonnage needed.

One of the nice things about using money for ship purchases, vs using the current tonnage system, is that there are and have been countries that have had little production capacity of their own but that have had the money to buy ships outside their own countries (the ABC powers after the turn of the 20th Century, the modern OPEC powers, etc).

It also makes a system where you pay for other non-productive governmental items (armies, air forces, R&D, etc) a little easier conceptually (for me, anyway, "factories" don't do much R&D, and a factory that produces items for warships is of limited value in producing aircraft). And it works nicely for paying the crews and troops.


I would expect we'd still need something like the current factories, to simulate the heavy industry that is present and necessary for domestic production of heavy items (like larger warships, tanks, etc). But that could be as simple as "1 monetary unit pays for 1 factories production (1000 tons) for 1 quarter".

When you start delving into things that complex, you have to start asking; What kind of sim do we want ro run? A primarily naval "What if?" scenario like WW Started as, or a comprehensive Alternate History Geopolitical sim?

I'm wary of getting too much into details with armies and air forces and technology in general, because in a lot of cases that ends up with players who're experts in that field having a great deal of an advantage over others who're focused in other areas. As it is, it's been hard for me having Canada produce an effective Army and Air Force because I'm not read up or really educated in those areas enough to produce them from scratch, and there isn't much historical Canadian military I can expand on from the period.

I agree some kind of rules or better guidelines for those aspects are probably needed, but it also has to take into account a method of keeping a more or less level playing field between our resident experts and those who aren't.

The aspects that interest me are more the 'what if', which is why the strictures of cleito were annoying, as it felt more Alt-Hist.

I just don't understand the appeal of $ as a metric. Historically the amount of money a country spent on it's navy was subject to political expediency.

Compare Germany pre and post the Kaiser's building program and I doubt the economy grew at the same rate as the money showered on it. Meanwhile GB's peacetime navy grew to counter. In a sim, where would that $ come from?

Then look to the Soviet Union and the 5 year plans. The GDP might have been miserable, but they fielded a huge army, armored force and air force in the 1920s, while massively increasing in infrastructure as well. The US probably had a much bigger GDP and a distinctly smaller military in the 1920s. Different political realities and security realities meant different amounts of $ were available.


I've made my pitch for resources, no takers. Pity.
Funny how I view it as important, and it really isn't seen that way by others. Could just be that logistics- no matter how vital- isn't much fun.

Resources are extremely important, but more during wartime (when access may be cut off) than peacetime (when, for the most part, they flow to where they're desired).


Amount of money available is definitely elastic, varying based on the desire of the country's government to increase spending and the size and state of that country's economy.

One thing to consider, a typical steel mill can produce anywhere between 50,000 and 3,000,000 tons of steel a year depending on wether its an integrated mill or a mini-mill and the type of steel it produces (bar or sheet ect.). I don't know about you but thats enough steel for quite a nice naval program!

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
One thing to consider, a typical steel mill can produce anywhere between 50,000 and 3,000,000 tons of steel a year depending on wether its an integrated mill or a mini-mill and the type of steel it produces (bar or sheet ect.). I don't know about you but thats enough steel for quite a nice naval program!

Based on sawmills, there is a designed rate of work, and a minimum rate below which they become financially unfeasible. Making a very very big mill is doable, but then you need a larger wood basin to draw from and transport system to feed it.

I would expect most steel mills and foundaries to be able to run at around 2.8x base production merely by running triple shifts, though some downtime for shift changes and maintenance would effect.

Quality might take a hit also. Further if you are trying for top end steels, you either need more of the alloy metals, or dilute the %, or substitute. Japan lacked much nickel, used copper where they could but it was lower quality.

It iis likely easier to arrange triple the workers than tripling the power supply, ore delivery, and rate of mining and smelting that feed the facility.

Maybe you need to create "Kirkworld" instead.

Random thoughts:

-I agree with ShinRa - if you're going to start a new sim, you have to know what you want your focus to be, and tailor the rest accordingly.

-Tech trees can be useful, but also confining. It does lead to "anticipation" of new tech if the general player population knows in advance what becomes available and when.

-If you go with dollars as the base unit of "Stuff", it's not a problem to hike the cost of expensive stuff like destroyers and submarines. In Navalism, we hiked the cash cost by 25% and 100% respectively.

-A naval treaty really isn't needed if you have some basic, consistent economic and tech baselines in place from the start. Everybody'll be on the same page to start, and then they can go and specialize in whatever direction(s) they prefer after that.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
One thing to consider, a typical steel mill can produce anywhere between 50,000 and 3,000,000 tons of steel a year depending on wether its an integrated mill or a mini-mill and the type of steel it produces (bar or sheet ect.). I don't know about you but thats enough steel for quite a nice naval program!

Another consideration is a more realistic approach to civilian/wartime economy. Yeah, one plant can produce that much tonnage, but during peacetime 90% of that would be sold to various non-sim affecting concerns. Wartime, you'd see the output more directed to government needs, but it'd still be split between tanks, planes, jeeps, buildings, etc....and ships.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
One thing to consider, a typical steel mill can produce anywhere between 50,000 and 3,000,000 tons of steel a year depending on wether its an integrated mill or a mini-mill and the type of steel it produces (bar or sheet ect.). I don't know about you but thats enough steel for quite a nice naval program!

Another consideration is a more realistic approach to civilian/wartime economy. Yeah, one plant can produce that much tonnage, but during peacetime 90% of that would be sold to various non-sim affecting concerns. Wartime, you'd see the output more directed to government needs, but it'd still be split between tanks, planes, jeeps, buildings, etc....and ships.

Yes I'm well aware of that, I just though it was worth pointing out just how much materials we could be handling.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
Yes I'm well aware of that, I just though it was worth pointing out just how much materials we could be handling.

I know, I just wanted to preempt any megalomania from Walter...