SDNWorld Redux - Casting Call & Planning

[Siege]

Ok, I will start doing that. I have plenty of time anyway so no rush to do this but I would like a few things cleared up:

-Either 250,000 people at a first world level of income or 500,000 at a second world level
-A military of 1,000-2,500 personel (depending on US)

What does "US" mean? Does it relate to the income level above (500,00=2'500 personal)?

For the record, I don't think those numbers are accurate anymore. Earlier on (in this very thread I believe) we significantly amped the size and significance of Duchies.

As for your military, RogueIce compiled an excellent spreadsheet, which can be found here. Just take the 100 points allocated to Duchies and knock yourself out compiling the armed forces of your heart's desire .

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Ok, I will start doing that. I have plenty of time anyway so no rush to do this but I would like a few things cleared up:

-Either 250,000 people at a first world level of income or 500,000 at a second world level
-A military of 1,000-2,500 personel (depending on US)

What does "US" mean? Does it relate to the income level above (500,00=2'500 personal)?

For the record, I don't think those numbers are accurate anymore. Earlier on (in this very thread I believe) we significantly amped the size and significance of Duchies.

As for your military, RogueIce compiled an excellent spreadsheet, which can be found here. Just take the 100 points allocated to Duchies and knock yourself out compiling the armed forces of your heart's desire :D.

That's correct, those numbers are now a dead letter.

[Beowulf]

For the record: spiral 3 of my proposed system will include army units, along with a fully integrated points system. Thus, you will be able to downsize sections of the military to pay for other sections being increased in size. Ice will release a new spreadsheet shortly afterward.

Armies are a lot harder to do than navies or air forces.

[PeZook]

Am I perverted? I mean, seriously. While everybody else is doing cool stuff like declaring fighter jets and ships and stuff, I'm trying to compose several different maps of my country, including infrastructure, industry, terrain and raw resources.

I'm lost, aren't I?

[Bluewolf]

Ok, this is what I got from this thread:

The only reason the Duchies suffered in the last game was because of their financial/geographic/militaristic insignificance. If we up the GDP, but not up it to the point where they are 900billions, I think we can make them not-insignificant while still keeping them... as Duchies. Hence 300 billion GDP, Austria, Saudi Arabia, Hong Kong - it's not a bad deal!



Might i sugjest raising the Population of the Ducthies to 1 Million First World, 2 million Second World and doubling their landmasses acordingly?

A population of 3 million is too small. Better to have it the size of Sweden so that they can still exercise some degree of politics and mean something.
The Spain model worked well for me.

How about this? A sliding scale of points--

A person gets points based on their post count, and you can spend it on land size, industrial might, population, and military professionalism.

So if you put a few points in industrialism, but a lot of points in military professionalism, you have a great military but they have to buy their stuff elsewhere.

You can also, for example, decrease land size to increase population, industrialization, and wealth and have a crowded nation (1980's Japan), like.

Or spend points on massive land area, medium population, medium industry, lower overall wealth, and have late Soviet Union.


That's why Duchies will get 500-700 billion GDPs this time, making them actual countries rather than speedbumps. 8000+ guys would still be able to take you on, but it won't be cheap or bloodless.


I say Duchies get 500 bil, on the level of Sweden, 800 bil for Principalities, 1.3 trillion for Kingdoms, 2.5 for Tsardoms and 5 for Imperiums. Military assets are fielded according to comparisons with real-world countries.

So I am still a bit confused on what excaclty Duchies have with the varying figures.

[DarthShady]

I decided to post here so that we don't clutter the Maps thread too much.

United Socialist Shadow Republic? Very Happy

That would get the attention of Stas. Wink

Awesome idea.

I think I'll use that, provided that Stas(or someone else) doesn't mind.

I will consider it the right of the mapmaker to edit national boundaries to fit into the two-continent scheme, and also for topographical reasons, unless there's an extreme objection to that. Size won't be changed, though, and desired placement will be guaranteed by this measure.

This is an excellent idea and I don't see why it would be a problem for anybody.

I mean Stas volunteered to do the world map, the least we could do is try and make it easier for him.

[RogueIce]

Am I perverted? I mean, seriously. While everybody else is doing cool stuff like declaring fighter jets and ships and stuff, I'm trying to compose several different maps of my country, including infrastructure, industry, terrain and raw resources.

I'm lost, aren't I?

No, but this does mean we'll start hitting you up to do the same for us.

[PeZook]

Am I perverted? I mean, seriously. While everybody else is doing cool stuff like declaring fighter jets and ships and stuff, I'm trying to compose several different maps of my country, including infrastructure, industry, terrain and raw resources.

I'm lost, aren't I?

No, but this does mean we'll start hitting you up to do the same for us.

Yeah, well, get back to me once my mapmaking software stops messing up the overlays

I think I'll just use a graphical program.

[Siege]

So I am still a bit confused on what excaclty Duchies have with the varying figures.

Just stick with a ~$350 billion GDP and a population somewhere inbetween Sweden and The Netherlands, and you should be fine. That's what I'm doing, at any rate.

[Bluewolf]

Just stick with a ~$350 billion GDP and a population somewhere inbetween Sweden and The Netherlands, and you should be fine. That's what I'm doing, at any rate.

I guess an army about the same size as those countries would do as well. Thanks.

Just another question. The spreadsheet air force part has 4/5 generation fighter. Is that a term for the latest fighters over the years?

[Setzer]

Yes. 4th Gen stuff is what fills out the ranks of first world militaries now, stuff like the F/A-18, MiG-29, SU-27, etc. 5th generation is stuff like the F-22, state of the art jets that haven't been widely mass produced.

[Bluewolf]

So lets say a Eurofighter Typhoon would be 5 gen coming 4th gen? 3rd gen would be past fighters like the F4 and the F16?

[Setzer]

Quick question, how many points would a hospital ship take?

[Beowulf]

The Typhoon is considered a 4.5 gen fighter, which is being simplified to 4th gen. The F-16 is also a 4th gen fighter.

[Bluewolf]

Ok, thank you for telling me. I will begin planning. What does "lightweight" mean?/

[Sea Skimmer]

The Typhoon is considered a 4.5 gen fighter, which is being simplified to 4th gen. The F-16 is also a 4th gen fighter.

So that means a Su-27 from 1984 and a Eurofighter from 2008 are rated the same…. That’s not going to be very valid now it is. I say screw the points if its going to be like this, just make people pay for stuff in real costs in game; and subject all OOB for preexisting equipment to approval before we start or before a new player joins.

[Beowulf]

The Typhoon is considered a 4.5 gen fighter, which is being simplified to 4th gen. The F-16 is also a 4th gen fighter.

So that means a Su-27 from 1984 and a Eurofighter from 2008 are rated the same…. That’s not going to be very valid now it is. I say screw the points if its going to be like this, just make people pay for stuff in real costs in game; and subject all OOB for preexisting equipment to approval before we start or before a new player joins.

We're going for sim-lite level of realism. If we go to your level of detail, no one will make an OOB, because it's too complex. And then the arguments will start, because someone will have one cost for their equipment, and another will have a different cost for that equipment. And both will be perfectly valid costings. And that difference in cost can be as much as 6:1! Not so random example: someone gets a wing of B-2s. One costing is about $550 million, which is what Northrup quoted the USAF to build more of them, shortly before the line was shutdown. Another costing is $2.2 billion. Trying to determine true cost of a aircraft is far to variable to try to use it to determine an OOB in this game.

A possible solution is to stick 4.5 gen as it's own category, midway in cost between 4 and 5 gen. However, then we start getting into sticky issues like: F-15C with APG-63v(3) versus Su-30MKI. The Su is conventionally considered to be 4.5 gen, and the F-15 to be 4 gen. However, the capability gap between the two is low. Should a Su-30 really cost much more than a F-15?

To answer Bluewolf's question: Lightweight is one of those terms that you know when you see it, unfortunately. F-16s are lightweight. F/A-18Cs are lightweight. F-15s aren't lightweight. F-35s are, F-22s aren't. It's not as simple as single engine vs. twin either. As pointed out above, F/A-18Cs are, but are twin engine.

[Sea Skimmer]

We're going for sim-lite level of realism. If we go to your level of detail, no one will make an OOB, because it's too complex.

Well my proposal makes the OOB stage easier actually, just find a nation with a similar level of military spending and make up something based on that general level of capability. Then we all post for approval and make adjustments after some arguing, which is going to happen any way about it!

As for cost issues, that’s why I proposed making a list FIRST, which could then also be used to estimate the costs of fictional or modified planes people want to start flying. The intent would be to use actual aircraft production costs, plus maybe maintenance and support costs, not total program costs which give you that 2.2 billion dollar B-2.

A possible solution is to stick 4.5 gen as it's own category, midway in cost between 4 and 5 gen. However, then we start getting into sticky issues like: F-15C with APG-63v(3) versus Su-30MKI. The Su is conventionally considered to be 4.5 gen, and the F-15 to be 4 gen. However, the capability gap between the two is low. Should a Su-30 really cost much more than a F-15?

I’ve always thought the Su-30MKI was just a forth generation plane in all reality myself, its lacking most of the traits of 4.5 generation and just isn’t that advanced. My main issue is with Rafael and above all the Typhoon, plus the F-16 Block 60 and F-15SG, but maybe I guess most people wont know the differences AESA radar and a reduced signature vs. stealth plane anyway.

I guess the main reason I care is just because I’d rather everyone not end up with as many F-22s as they want, it makes it so much harder to use other aircraft. I’d like Japanistan top fighter to be a Typhoon, with enlarged strike version (MTOW raised 20,000lb) just starting to fly trials, but that doesn’t work if the likes of every China and Holland are flying Raptors.

Maybe we could just disallow 5th generation fighters from starting orders of battle? If you want a F-22/F-35 you can have an advanced state of R&D but not 300 of them already sitting on the tarmac? After all, the B-2 was is just absurdly difficult to operate, while the F-22 has only been in service a few years (still not fully equipped either) and F-35 wounderceptor keeps getting delayed and more expensive.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Actually, it strikes me another factor to bring into play is how big a budget one intends to allocate to a military. No point having all the bells and whistles, when you intend to mothball the a good chunk of them.

That said, not everyone for certain will be using a F-22/35. I for one don't really have the funds to fund a hundred F-22s, even with a 120billion budget, and I'd probably have most of my aircraft being F-15K/SG (which is better anyway? The F-15K is definitely more expensive.), F-18E/F and F-14s, though the Typhoon Tranche 3 is an attractive option.

[Sea Skimmer]

Defense spending can vary from about .08-1% for relatively unthreatened semi demilitarized states, to as much as 27-35% if we have any Stalinist or Nazi ‘mobilize in peacetime’ dictatorships around. Most nations which maintain a significant military posture would spend 3-5%. Mind you, one cannot spend more then a fraction of the total budget on new weapons and equipment, not to mention all the supporting gear and spare parts and fuel you need.

This pdf shows the breakdown of the latest US military procurement budget to give you an idea of how money gets split up.

[Beowulf]

I'd be up to 5th generation fighters being in service only in limited quantities. So I might have a squadron or two, but not 6 fighter groups worth. Smaller countries would naturally have smaller quantities.

[TimothyC]

Stupid Question. Would it be possible for a smaller nations (such as myself) to mount a much more advanced radar into an older airframe (say an F-106 or an F-4), leading to essentially a modern version of the above mentioned aircraft?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Defense spending can vary from about .08-1% for relatively unthreatened semi demilitarized states, to as much as 27-35% if we have any Stalinist or Nazi ‘mobilize in peacetime’ dictatorships around. Most nations which maintain a significant military posture would spend 3-5%. Mind you, one cannot spend more then a fraction of the total budget on new weapons and equipment, not to mention all the supporting gear and spare parts and fuel you need.

This pdf shows the breakdown of the latest US military procurement budget to give you an idea of how money gets split up.

Is there a similar breakdown for the maintenance, pay and so forth?

[Sea Skimmer]

Stupid Question. Would it be possible for a smaller nations (such as myself) to mount a much more advanced radar into an older airframe (say an F-106 or an F-4), leading to essentially a modern version of the above mentioned aircraft?

You can certainly mount better radars in old planes and generally upgrade systems, even replace engines to a limited degree. Its generally cheaper then buying a new plane, but aircraft airframes have limited fatigue lives so you can’t just keep upgrading the same exact plane forever. Its common to upgrade existing planes as an interim step to new fighters. This has become more important then ever in the 2000s when aircraft development timeframes are all decade or decades long. I think we’ll be squishing that down for game purposes though; otherwise the moon missions are never going to get done.

I fully intend to have my air force equipped primarily with older and sometimes upgraded planes, while a major air rearmament effort is being pushed forward to modernize and abolish the reserve suicide wings.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I fully intend to have my air force equipped primarily with older and sometimes upgraded planes, while a major air rearmament effort is being pushed forward to modernize and abolish the reserve suicide wings.

Won't it be better to have UCAVs of the "jet engine + minimal airframe + bomb" type?