StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Yeah, the only thing is that I don't really know enough about tanks to build anything realistic and most sources jump from WWI to the early 30's so that gives me little to base new designs around. Though I suppose I could look at 1927 designs and simply scale them back if I get too stuck...

Fiat 3000, etc. Most 1920s designs didn't stick for long, really. That's because the armies used WWI tanks for quite a bit of time, actually. And tank progress was going rather fast. By 1928, tank projects which result in the early 1930s' series were well underway.

Stas Bush wrote:My OOB (land forces) has been posted. Any objections?

It looks good, but I'm curious in a nonhostile fashion as to the composition of your 'tank armada'.

Disregard that. I missed your breakdown on my first pass through.

I think I may build off of Fiat's designs, I think a modernized Fiat 2000 could do very well as a modern tank design with the Mark VIII's finally being pushed to the rear. The 3000's wold also be used as well as they are really fitting for the image of a modern tank.

So far I'm seeing my tank brigades using 5 designs:

P/HT1, Based on the Mark VIII, Obsolete and slow, used mainly as stationary bunkers, some have been converted to troop carriers.

P/HT2, this design is more modern than the Fiat 2000 in which it finds its design lineage and has 30mm frontal armor, and 25mm side armor. It uses a 65mm cannon in a turret with a pintle mounted .50 machinegun on a ring for a good field of fire, it would also have a pair of lighter machine guns forward on each side of the driver. It's top speed would be a brisk 18mph and her range an impressive 120 miles.

P/MT1, this design is based off of the Fiat 3000 if she weighed in at closer to 12 tons than 6. She has a maximum armor thickness of 20mm and at her thinnest 10mm, her main gun is a 40mm design and she has a single secondary machine gun on the top of her turret. Her top speed is 20mph and her range is 100 miles.

P/LT1, based off of a modernized Fiat 3000 this tank is armed with dual mounting of 20mm cannons, her armor is at maximum 15mm think and at thinnest is 5mm, she can move at 18mph and has a range of 75 miles.

P/TT1, a tankette originally used for towing light guns and as a mobile machine gun position, she is an older design and is considered out of date for front line duties. Most often this design is used to haul supplies on trailers along the lines or as a scout vehicle not expected to see combat.

I'll be copying Fiat 3000 and building some inter-war tankettes in the late 1920s. In the early 30s I'll have a plethora of stuff to choose from.

Shep, are you in the mood to do any negotiating with regards to the Suez canal? Otherwise, i'll send a similar letter.

Or I am walking into a bunch of lion's teeth.

One thing: We ought to be allowed to react and act as if we are countries with a history. E.g. if we are dealing with a nation with a history of being dicks or commies or what not we should be allowed to act on that.

EDIT: But, as for the Byzantines, I'm sure that the Shepistanis are going to be reasonable and rational individuals, led by levelheaded and pragmatic people.

EDIT 2: And just for the record the vast bulk of Brazilian shipping is in the Atlantic. I'm not even sure if I have diplomatic connections with Shepistan and the Grand Dominion, probably not though. So hopefully I can ignore this mess.

Norseman wrote:One thing: We ought to be allowed to react and act as if we are countries with a history. E.g. if we are dealing with a nation with a history of being dicks or commies or what not we should be allowed to act on that.

EDIT: But, as for the Byzantines, I'm sure that the Shepistanis are going to be reasonable and rational individuals, led by levelheaded and pragmatic people.

Sarcasm aside, Byzantine diplomacy has always been typically pragmatic. Making deals with the enemy in exchange for some benefits is not unheard of. Even for ideologically opposite countries.

Otherwise, the Byzantines wouldn't have even bothered talking to the Sassanids or the Muslims for that matter.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Sarcasm aside, Byzantine diplomacy has always been typically pragmatic. Making deals with the enemy in exchange for some benefits is not unheard of.

There's pragmatic and then there's walking in crocodile infested waters, while flapping a steak in the water hoping that they'll be it instead of you.

Norseman wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Sarcasm aside, Byzantine diplomacy has always been typically pragmatic. Making deals with the enemy in exchange for some benefits is not unheard of.

There's pragmatic and then there's walking in crocodile infested waters, while flapping a steak in the water hoping that they'll be it instead of you.

Like? We have hardly even bothered to lay down any deals on the table.

Though your belligerence is understandable considering what happened the last time.

Shepistan and the OD are militaristic total war nations. That's enough reason to be careful.

Stas Bush wrote:Shepistan and the OD are militaristic total war nations. That's enough reason to be careful.

Oh sure. But this nonsense in the sea is costing me business which I cannot abide. So unless someone has a better solution, please, show it to me.

Okay, posted the demands. If I misspelled the name of a country of someone, please PM me. Some of you did not give official names iirc, so I just used what I thought was sensible.

No offence is meant, just PM me and I'll quickly correct it.

Thanas wrote:Okay, posted the demands. If I misspelled the name of a country of someone, please PM me. Some of you did not give official names iirc, so I just used what I thought was sensible.

No offence is meant, just PM me and I'll quickly correct it.

I'll actually be changing my nation's name to 'Nordic Union' (of Scandinavia), but 'Scandinavia' works well enough. Up to you if you wish to change it.

Fixed it.

Thanas, is that every nation on earth aside from Shepistan and the Dominion that will embargo them?

Thanas wrote:Okay, posted the demands. If I misspelled the name of a country of someone, please PM me. Some of you did not give official names iirc, so I just used what I thought was sensible.

No offence is meant, just PM me and I'll quickly correct it.

It's only really the Kingdom of Spain now... but don't change it, makes Spain feel like a real Empire again.

Sea Skimmer wrote:An artillery brigade should be a corps level attachment. Another one to three would be found at the Army level; additional ones might be held at the level of army group or more likely allocated to the supreme command to use as strategic assets as army groups usually don’t exist in peacetime. Other then some very short lived Nazi experiments only the Russians ever used artillery divisions and they were Army Group/Front level assets. Post WW2 the ratio was 1 per front though during the war it could be three or four if the front had a major offensive role to play.

Regardless of calibers it was the corps artillery that did most of the heavy lifting in combat, shooting country battery and interdiction missions as well as providing the oomph for major attacks. Divisional level guns primarily fired for missions of only immediate importance to the division, which usually meant some kind of direct support role or call fire. Army level guns basically slotted in alongside the corps weapons.

Keep in mind that however many artillery pieces you have, you are still limited by how much ammo you can produce and how many spare barrels you have (a large portion of total production in war would go into rearming existing guns, because they get worn out and when you fire millions of shells some are bound to explode in the bore and wreck barrels). Huge artillery forces would have lower states of training, and take much longer to equip with radios and motorize. Though of course on the latter two subjects, only the British and US reached a standard of full motorization and full scale implementation of radio based fire control before the end of WW2.

Ok for some simple numbers: The standard French infantry division was 17,500 men with 60 guns. Its German and Polish counterparts both 16,500 men with 48 guns. The Czechs 52 guns. The Italians 44. All sans the Italians were generally organized into 3 infantry and attached artillery regiment.

Now compare to the 15,000 man three brigade standard here. Two solutions. Either you add support brigades and then calculate everything at the brigade level with the infantry and cavalry brigades being just that with no embedded artillery (with a minimum of call it 1 support brigade for every 4 teeth ones).

Alternatively get higher manpower slots per division, 25,000 sounds about right and easy to use and put limits on the max number of artillery brigades relative to divisions, again no more than 1 per 2 or 3 divisions sounds about right given their role as corps and army level assets.

Okay my naval OoB is posted in an initial form. All the information is correct, but I will be adding data as time permits.

Thanas: the official name of my country is the Blue Sultanate of Sudan.

I know I haven't been around much(I will rectify that soon.), I've been having some RL problems, that kept me away. I hope to have an OOB and an introduction post ready soon(relatively soon.)

I need to get things finalized and approved by Steve first though.

Given a challenge to the rather comprehensive list of countries that jumped in with Germany so quickly, I'm reducing it to a joint condemnation from France and Germany (given the French president was right there and all) until the point can be argued.

As a point to go with that, this is the 1920s, not the 2000s, joint resolutions would be harder to set up and telegraph and telephone of the era doesn't come close to modern video conferencing and global communication.

That said, if other players want to maintain their condemnation I ask them to post such in-character (if you already have that's fine, though we should probably arrange a timeline to see which ones the German Chancellor could reasonably know of for when that list is reinstated in any form).

As a final note, there is apparently some confusion on whether the Arabian Sea would be logically considered a war zone. Since the Shep-GD naval fighting and such has apparently been ongoing since the war it would stand to reason that most countries would consider it such and some shipping has shifted to avoid the Sea as much as possible (hugging the coast of Africa for instance). A potential boon, admittedly, for Sudan and Madagascar, but it also changes the situation quite a bit. Though certainly there should still be some irritation over the matter since that's a major Europe-Asia trade route and we should see such.

Steve,

Given the time frame (2mo=1year) from when this first became an incident (Nov 10th) you have two days or about 3 weeks in game. That would be more than sufficient time for the Germans to create a note, circulate it to the various embassies in Berlin (who would request instructions via wireless or cable). A response in principle, which is what the note amounts to as it is not a binding treaty, could be returned within a week or so from most nations that are constitutional or absolutist monarchies. The Republican or otherwise representative nations seem less likely to have such a rapid response but again this isn't a treaty.

Since it is a response in principle or, in diplomatic convention, a formal note, none of the participant nations has staked itself to this action in any binding manner. Now that doesn't mean it has no force as a note often preceeds a more formal action BUT there is still a lot of wiggle room on both sides. In other words I think as a "note" and not an ultimatum or even a note with a time limit for a response then Germany certainly had sufficient time to organize the nation grouping it got.

IIRC, Steve slowed down the starting point for awhile, and we haven't even cleared January yet.

Wilkens, I also declared a time freeze for the first week to permit players a chance to get settled and such, since we have a few - Shinn and Shady for instance - who are currently wrapped up in other things, and quite a few who don't have full OrBats.

Steve wrote:Wilkens, I also declared a time freeze for the first week to permit players a chance to get settled and such, since we have a few - Shinn and Shady for instance - who are currently wrapped up in other things, and quite a few who don't have full OrBats.

Damn missed that, okay yeah then this note should take a hell of a lot longer to get out...my bad.