Time Period for SDN World 3

[K. A. Pital]

Actually, for 1925 the bad state of large nation's militaries is something to be well expected. China or India weren't super military powers.

[Ma Deuce]

So we are using the real world as the basis for this map, yes? Aside from geography, I do have a few questions about how much ahistorality (is that even a real word?) is allowed concerning population, wealth, natural resources etc before making any decision on where I would want to base my country. For instance, I imagine I'd be quite cozy on the landmass of RL Madagascar, though it'd not necessarily be Madagascar; and note that I'm not officially claiming before Steve posts the thread, just floating one of my candidates for the purpose of this query, on account of being a decent sized island with a good natural anchorage (I'd be willing to accept any points penalties that come from being an island nation), since being a new player I'd intend to start out cautiously with a somewhat isolationist foreign policy (at least at first).

Though if the population and natural resources must mimic what they were historically, then suddenly it becomes a much less attractive option, even if the island never was a French colony in this world.

[Steve]

I'm not certain how much break from reality we'll allow for stuff like natural resources. Historical alterations are being permitted, though.

[Shroom Man 777]

If we're picking shit, I'm picking California. So I can be Baron Ronald von Reagan!


And vote me for mod.

[Mr Bean]

Well I've gone and claimed Britain since no on else has. I shall acquire a top-hat and monocle and a title shortly.

[RogueIce]

I've been going over the ruleset, and I was wondering if 30 points might not just be too little to spend. Because with those 30 points, it is nearly impossible to have large-sized countries that do not have a 1 in every military category only.

I've got a decent military, though I did cut a bit for my Army and Air Force (but that was a deliberate decision). Steve did posit having 35 points when we were discussing things on IM, but then I pointed out that for people like me, who don't have a colony (given my planned historical background and geography, there really isn't anywhere that makes sense) having even 5 extra points would make me a tad overpowered; there's pretty much nowhere else for them to go but my military.

I suppose depending on the final ruleset things can still be tinkered with (I'm pretty sure it's been modified somewhat since I did some numbers) but I'm just tossing it out there.

No. Something different this time. God that joke is getting old.

*plans to invade RogueIce*

So where do you plan staking your claim?

The northeastern/midwest parts of the US. I'm blue on the claims map. Assuming it's not changed.

[Zor]

To bring up a point, this world's history of this universe going to be VERY different from OTL because of Fingolfin's Byzantium.

Zor

[Siege]

Yeah, and by association my Sultanate will be pretty different as well; no Ottomans means no Muhammad Ali to base my lineage on...

[Ryan Thunder]

No problem for me. My country is just Miratia under different circumstances anyway.

[Ma Deuce]

I'm not certain how much break from reality we'll allow for stuff like natural resources. Historical alterations are being permitted, though.

Since it seems I have in fact settled on Madagascar and nobody has yet seen fit to dispute it, I'm cooking up something of a half-baked alt-history for the island, including earlier discovery and extraction of the island's mineral wealth by the locals with some foreign assistance (which even today is not heavily exploited, save for gemstones), turning it into a mining powerhouse, which fuels development, modernization, industrialization and trade, and a larger population than historically, ultimately allowing the Merina monarchy to be strong enough to fight off the French invaders in the 1880s, going on to become a respectable regional power yadda, yadda, yadda. Only vaguely realistic I know, but hey we already have stuff like the Byzantine Empire surviving to the 20th century, and Duchess's all-female nation might still make it into the game...

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

A question to ask. Thus far, the rules are on setting up each respective country. How about the rules for country growth especially with respect to economic growth?

[K. A. Pital]

I think that depends on pre-game history, fleshing out your economic and natural resources history. Nat. resources correspond to geography while the rest is more of a speculation you could turn either way.

[Zor]

I am going to keep it fairly simple and stick to the real life timeline of Japan fairly closely, with a few minor adjustments (The most notable of which being having the Royal Navy doing what Admiral Perry did at basically the same time).

Zor

[Thanas]

EDIT: Nevermind, figured it out. Springsharp works now.

[MKSheppard]

The Empire of Shepistan (or whatever I call it) will not be a signatory to any Washington Naval Treaty Analogue. We will fortify the fuck out of whatever islands we claim and build what we want.

[Ryan Thunder]

Yeah, I'm inclined to think that Navin wouldn't be too keen on it, either.

[Ma Deuce]

Yeah, I'm inclined to think that Navin wouldn't be too keen on it, either.

Why not? Are you going to be one of the world's most powerful navies?

[Thanas]

Germany would actually not be that much against a Naval Treaty, whatever its terms.

However, if two nations already said they will not sign it, I am hard-pressed to think whether this would not be pointless.

[Ryan Thunder]

Yeah, I'm inclined to think that Navin wouldn't be too keen on it, either.

Why not? Are you going to be one of the world's most powerful navies?

No. I just intend to build whatever I feel is necessary to defend myself.

[Ma Deuce]

Germany would actually not be that much against a Naval Treaty, whatever its terms.

I would have been quite open to a treaty as well, since I had always intended my country to be a small power paranoid about someone attempting to colonize me.

However, if two nations already said they will not sign it, I am hard-pressed to think whether this would not be pointless.

And that's the elephant in the room isn't it? While I was against an arbitrarily imposed treaty at the start of the game (even if I'd be willing to participate in negotiating one), I was still doubtful we'd be able to negotiate something that ALL the players would agree on, which is why I instead proposed a dockyard capacity system (which Steve indicated he'd tie into the Navy score, though didn't give specifics) to limit the size of ships at game start and to force players who want giant battleships to build progressively larger ships rather than jumping straight to Maximum Battleships as soon as they lay a new keel. Let's face it: In real life 1925 even without the WNT, no country would have capital ships in service much larger than 45,000 tons standard (the British G3s are the largest I can think of at 48,000 tons), and I find it unlikely that even with an unrestricted arms race that we'd see anything even approaching 60,000 tons laid down before 1930. There were some very practical reasons for this, namely that bigger dockyards were incredibly expensive and time consuming to build.

We might be able to factor the size of canals as well, barring passage to ships which exceed the stated dimensions of the locks, which again would be incredibly expensive and time-consuming to expand. One ship dimension I would not oppose a universal, unchangeable limit on is maximum draft, which I'd set at say, 11 meters (36 feet), given that virtually no harbors of this era are deeper than 40 feet.

[Thanas]

Yeah, I would like such an escalation as well. However, as I know that some players will jump straight to the maximum battleships, I have no choice but to follow suit if I don't want to be bullied by complete dicks.

[Steve]

I may lower the tonnage limit to forbid anything being built above 50Ktons, even if it denies me the beautiful 1920 Fast Battleship design that a friend found for me.

And the 50Kton limit might actually be rejiggered to require a Naval Focus of at least 4, if not 5.

Bleh, so much left to do. And I still need some idea of historical fleet sizes and such to determine how many points of fleet each Navy Focus number permits.

[Ma Deuce]

No. I just intend to build whatever I feel is necessary to defend myself.

And what if those you need to defend against are capable of significantly outbuilding you? In that case a treaty can work in your favour by arbitrarly limiting how much more powerful than you they can be (if they are allowed to be more powerful at all), and even if the treaty collapses, it will take them a few years at least to make up the difference.

Look at Japan and the WNT: their total tonnage of warships they were allowed to build was set at 60% that of the US and Britain. While the Japanese hyper-nationalists were very upset with the lower limit and screamed racism (nevermind that France and Italy had to accept even lower limits than them), they apparently failed to grasp that without the treaty, they would have only been able to afford say, 20% of the tonnage the US could build. Thus, the treaty was objectively very beneficial to Japan, allowing their relative naval power to be much higher than it otherwise would have been.

[Ryan Thunder]

No. I just intend to build whatever I feel is necessary to defend myself.

And what if those you need to defend against are capable of significantly outbuilding you?

My naval strategy is defensive in nature, and I have a reasonably high naval and industry rating. I have no colonial interests abroad to tie my navy up; if they want to do me harm that way, they'll have to send almost their entire navy just to break even with me, and I'll be able to cut their supply chain.

So it's unlikely, I figure, assuming my logic is sound...

[Steve]

If your navy is to defend coastal waters you don't need Navy Focus of 4 or 5. Hell, with your coastline a 2 might be enough, since a realistic navy for your Gran Colombia would be based on protecting coastal waters and the Panama Canal.

Frankly at this point I'm ready to tie Navy Focus into Colonial Territory to A) encourage people to stop using it as a sink score and B) reflect that if you don't have overseas colonies, you don't need a long-ranging Navy as much.