WesWorld

Hi I'm Dave's Wife. As referenced by Bernhard I had a bit of a rant at Dave and him one day about how people here (from stories the two of them have told me!) have a modern mindset about the politics of the early 20th Century.

Today people grew up with the spectre of total war, and the sabre rattling is backed up with quite a bit of bomb power.

Then was different, see Kipling for politics of the time, also see Kipling for the fluidity of borders. The map of the world wasn't as semi-solid as it is now. Countries would try to assert their boundries beyond where they really were to see what happened, to see what another country would do, and retreat all of a sudden if the other country tried to invade.

Yeah I did history in college and it was almost 10 years ago and I did more medieval than modern but I'm willing to debate this one a bit.

Deirdre

Welcome to the Boards Deirdre!

Thanks for the insight. I think some of us do tend to think in modern terms. The League of nations and now the UN also have a bigger hand in preventing conflicts or giving the two party's a venue to discuss their greivences as well.

Rudyard Kipling? I can't think of anyone else.

Deirdre - what a nice surprise! I wasn´t aware you´re around. Welcome to our boards. Guess we have to be careful with a certain type of humor now that a lady is among us. ;o)

Regarding your original topic: I think there is A LOT of hindsight here in/on Wesworld. The experience of the last 60 years can easily be identified among our posts and designs. One can also see how real world incidents and threats (terrorists, tsunamis etc.) are reflected in our WesWorld News Section. At leasts that´s what I sense now and then...

We sometimes do not take into account just how long and difficult to use (hence unreliable) communication lines where then and how long it took a nation to react if one of its territories on the other side of the globe was affected by "whatever".

Tell me about it! I usually give at least 1 days grace before responding to a foriegn statement but even then thats probably abit too quick.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Rudyard Kipling? I can't think of anyone else.

Yup, see Kim for Victorian Intelligence Gathering.

There were a few English Authors writing between the wars, Early Saint novels (Leslie Charteris), Blackshirt by Bruce Graheme (among some of the Bulldog Drummond types) and Tommy & Tuppence novels by Agatha Christie have some interesting background stuff about damage to psyche's and bodies from the first world war. And the boredom that many of the ex-soldiers, particularly officers suffered.

You also see in many of those novels the secret services trying to stop another war almost at any cost.

The main threats they could see were Russia and the "Yellow Peril" - it was seriously not a politically correct period.

Deirdre

Are there any serious flaws you can see in certain nations relations?

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Deirdre - what a nice surprise! I wasn´t aware you´re around. Welcome to our boards. Guess we have to be careful with a certain type of humor now that a lady is among us. ;o)

Thanks for the welcome! Ask CG someday about me and a certain going away party and a porn mag.

Quoted

Regarding your original topic: I think there is A LOT of hindsight here in/on Wesworld. The experience of the last 60 years can easily be identified among our posts and designs. One can also see how real world incidents and threats (terrorists, tsunamis etc.) are reflected in our WesWorld News Section. At leasts that´s what I sense now and then...

We sometimes do not take into account just how long and difficult to use (hence unreliable) communication lines where then and how long it took a nation to react if one of its territories on the other side of the globe was affected by "whatever".

Yup, many moments in Saint novels are helped by the fact that information can't reach the person who should be arresting him!

I have seriously read too many books from that era. (There are those who would say I read too many books!)

Deirdre

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
Are there any serious flaws you can see in certain nations relations?

I haven't read much.. yet... I'm kinda relying on CG and LA's occasional commentary up to this point.

Deirdre

Welcome aboard, ma'am!

Yeah, we do have quite a bit of "hindcasting" going on...but perhaps your points will make the Filipinos' adventurism less controversial?
Naaahhh... XD

Welcome to the board.

I will say that I attempt to think "in period". Not always successfully. This has lead to several incidents of me ignoring advise because I think its too "hindsight" oriented. The main trouble being that I don't know the exact mindset of the Chilean peoples in the 1920s...or today even. I have to guess on what I think they might be like from what history I do know, and what cultural ideologies I can come up with for Spanish South Americans.

Quoted

Guess we have to be careful with a certain type of humor now that a lady is among us. ;o)

Whoops! That means I have to watch out with those perverted designers and that will result in less appearances of Handbag with brick inside (tm).
^_^;;

Quoted

We sometimes do not take into account just how long and difficult to use (hence unreliable) communication lines where then and how long it took a nation to react if one of its territories on the other side of the globe was affected by "whatever".

Japan has the advantage that it does not have territory on the other side of the world. So anything that affects the empire can reach the mainland reasonably fast and would be more reliable than news reaching London from the other side of the Empire (like the UK Pacific territories).

Quoted

I usually give at least 1 days grace before responding to a foriegn statement but even then thats probably abit too quick.

When it comes to an ally, I let it take one day (i.e. respond the next day, though that might be a bit fast). When it comes from a non-ally, it might take one day, but would be more likely to get a reply a bit later.

There's no doubt that hindsight influences foreign policy and ship designs in the WesWorld. We do trnd to be cautious, although in the case of my countries (France and Russia), the Great War was utterly catastrophic and thus not to be repeated. What we can do is try to keep it at least somewhat near the bounds of plausibility.

And the point about delayed and unreliable communications at this time is a good one. I too try to leave a few days of game time before responding to an event.

Hello Deidre,

Welcome aboard.

I did history as well, also mostly medieval. I should have listened to one of my profs and went to UCD...

I think that in the early 20th century the total scope of war wasn't quite realized. Even in the American Civil War, one could argue only W.T. Sherman grasped the concept of 'total war.'

The major conflicts around the turn of the century, the Spanish-American War and the Russo-Japanese War, were really on a much smaller scale than what Europe was capable of. War was something that took a lot of effort, preparation, planning, etc. And it was a bit of an adventure. And that latter I think was part of the perspective of the colonial adventurism of the second half of the 19th century. For every Isandlwana, there's a Rourke's Drift, so the idea that a war could nearly cost a generation isn't yet conceivable. I think that's where some of the fluidity and testing you mention comes into play.

I think the absolute meat-grinder of the trenches of World War I changed that perspective. War became something to be avoided, hence the rise of the League of Nations. But as usually happens historically, the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction, and the effort to avoid turned into 'avoid at all costs', becoming appeasement.

Ever since World War I, there is a knowledge of the mass destruction that mass production can result in. World War II reinforced that, and advent of atomic weapons sealed it.

All that said, I think it is very difficult for those of us two or three generations removed from the global realization of total war to grasp what things were like then. It's like asking someone to understand when the speed of travel was the speed of communication; most can't even fathom it.

I think a sim like Wesworld, very large in scope, spanning decades at a strategic level, has a very difficult time doing away with hindsight, let alone trying to put things into the proper historical perspective. Everyone just KNOWS, for example, that aircraft carriers are the weapon of the future. The treaty also has everyone allotted carrier tonnage, and in an effort to be fair, has relatively evenly distributed production. Absent a system with a referee, where some of the control is taken out of the hands of the player, or one where the discrepancies are far wider, and a nation might have to make a choice between capital ships or carriers or cruisers or light forces, things are bound to set off in that direction. Hence aircraft in Wesworld are well ahead of the historic development, aircraft carriers are far more numerous.

A more narrow sim or a narrow wargame might have an easier time getting things into perspective. I have a friend who is a huge wargamer, and one of his main criteria is historical realism. "Could this have actually happened?" is the most common question he asks when we game, and we debate it each time.

My somewhat disjointed thoughts.

Regards,

Big Rich

Thats a good post Rich, and one has to remember we have "players" from all walks of life here. Some like realism, some like role playing, some are history buffs and some like what we call "powergaming" so we sort of have a balance of idea's that don't always mesh neatly.

Overall its a learning experience for everyone here, the idea I had coming into this sim was to find a way for Naval buffs like all of us to create our Navy's in a realistic setting, where we may not always be able to reacte the way we would like or build the perfect fleet.

I think to some extent we succeeded, it may not be perfect but I think we realised that going into the sim.
If there ever is a Wesworld 2 I'm certain we have learned enough to work the bugs out.

I realize that, Wes. I'm not advocating a change or taking power out of the players hands. And I'm sure there are a lot of unique perspecitves on the sim. My point is simply that it's difficult to realistic sometimes.

As a long time board gamer, I can tell you one of the most difficult things to simulate is hidden movement. I've gamed different systems that attempt to do so, some more successful than others. But absent a referee who can see both boards and is neutral, I have to say it is tough to do well.

Wesworld as you say, is an ongoing learning experience. Like Dreadnought, someone had to do it first.

Regards,

Big Rich

Hiya Dee and welcome to the forum.

I am wondering and have kicked this back and forth a bit in my brain. The fact that you state that the secret services of the world were trying to avoid war at all cost points out to me that the Great War was a major shock. It saw the first use of WMD - Gas, it saw megadeaths to coin a cold war term. It was total war, at least for UK and Germany, the first one having to ration food, the latter not rationing food and nearly starving to death in the turnip winter of 1917/18. So I think the nonchalant way of having a war like in the 19th century had changed, as had the attitude. Hence the founding of the league of nations too.

oh and i think a wesworld 2 will be an improvement, as this game is changing and improving. But all the bugs? - nah, in Version 10 maybe

Oooh goodie, a history question. Firstly, welcome aboard, and my hat off to you, you let Dave buy a house without you seeing it and you let him live ; )

Wesworld makes no sense to me. It hurt my head trying to make it fit. I'm happier now that I don't try. About the only conclusion I can draw is that WW1 can't have occurred for the world to be like this. It is far too rich and too willing to spend on armaments after fighting the war to end wars. That said, I guess that makes me a powergamer.//end rant

Regarding the scaring of WW1. IIRC I saw some analysis that offensives of the same duration in WW2 caused just as many casualties as they did in WW1. The difference was that a WW1 offensive achieved no gains.

In relation to British rationing. Even with the submarine offensive at it's height, they never felt the need to reduce the ration of grain for Race Horses.

What interests me is what drives military innovation, the how and why. Contrast the British Army and the Germany Army post WW1. The German Army took aside a large portion of it's officers, conducted 50IIRC committees investigation war experience, what worked, what didn't why etc. They analysed everything pulling in as much scope and experience as possible. The British Army? Capt Liddel-Hart rewrote the 1913 Infantry Manual (yes 1913 - it wasn't updated during the war). Evidently success is a poor teacher.

People here may like 'Hearts of Iron2' it's set a bit later ,1936-1947 but you get to build what you want (and can hack the game setting if you like) but it covers all aspects of running a country - not just a navy. If there was more to the country running than just the navy then I'm sure people would play things more conservatively.

Cheers,

Quoted

If there was more to the country running than just the navy then I'm sure people would play things more conservatively.

Given the goings-on in Navalism , which includes army running (despite the name), I somehow doubt that. ;-)

Perhaps...perhaps.


All that I know about the Great War is Wesworld is that there was something called the "Great War" in Wesworld. From the redrawing of lines and the situation Germany is in I'd say it was suppose to be the First World War...but other things suggest it was a smaller conflict. Not so many lives lost. Not so much infrustructure and industry lost. Not as much money or men spent to gain victory over "no-man's land".

Even the dates for the war are not set in stone as of yet. Perhaps it was something like the Franco-Prussian War just the alliance system kicked it?

I don't know, but that is something to ponder.

Much like I have to ponder torpedo development, as I've removed a major event in history by not having the Chileans involved in a civil war in 1891....no historical first sinking of a warship by a torpedo. It would have still happened, but someplace else...perhaps still involving South America in this year, so that it doesn't effect destroyer evolution, torpedo evolution, nor anti-destroyer guns on capital ships evolution in the 1890s.