StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Raj Ahten wrote:I need some help from our military gurus in designing my nations force. I plan to have my nation be in the armpit of the world, surrounded by third world shit holes that are extremely unstable. So basically my military will be getting involved in lots of bush wars ala the apartheid era South African government. What sort of force structure would be good for that? My nation will have land borders with most of these places but to make things more interesting I am thinking of placing some of this states in an archipelago nearby necessitating a navy of some sort. Finally I'd like to have my nation maintain at least some capability for conventional opponents. Should I just loosely base my force on South Africa’s current or apartheid era forces or look elsewhere for inspiration?

Well, going from what I once heard (from Sea Skimmer) the SADF was widely dispersed due to the need to keep tabs on everything. They did manage to make most of their own weapons, unless it was too expensive, or if there was no threat.

If you're gonna be fighting brushfire wars, you'll want armored vehicles hardened against things like mines and RPGs. A decent tank force would be useful, as well as highly trained infantry, regardless of whether it's COIN or conventional war.

SAMs really won't be a priority, nor will large seagoing combatants, so you can get away with some older models there. Maybe a few frigates and destroyers, and some SSK, since I think they're quieter then SSNs, and cheaper too. Rebels rarely have decent anti-air, and a lot of trainers can be used as light bombers nowadays.

If there are trust issues with the Army, you can do what pretty much every Middle Eastern nation does and create a seperate force. Saddam had his Republican Guard, the Saudis have the National Guard, etc. There should be lots of overlapping authorities, so an ambitious general is never quite sure if a particular unit answers to him, or someone else. There would also be lots of red tape regarding training, so a coup can't be launched under the cover of an exercise.

MariusRoi wrote:I know I probably won't be able to afford them, but I'd like a pair of lthese.

Those, in that form, didn't even exist, did they? I suppose if you really wanted those you could say you have a couple of old big gun cruisers you got off of somebody and are modernizing them. But I don't think you could just start out with them.

If people want to start out with big gun battleships or gun cruisers they can just have them for free for all I care; the value of such ships is irrelevant on the strategic scale. Without modernization a single aircraft or coast missile battery or a sub or anything else can take one on and knock it out of action.

However if you want a big gun ship that’s also modernized with missiles and modern electronics that’s going to have to be paid for. I'd say the cost would be about as much as a destroyer for a basic SSM and point defense rearmament like the Iowa’s had in the 1980s. If you want to go all out and start adding SAMs and VLS it will cost more like the price of a cruiser (2 billion or so).

Heck, I think I’ll have a couple predreadnoughts or semi dreadnoughts around just for the hell of it, to go with all my other obsolete weapons.

My Premier Test Squadron's Logo.

I've decided on what I want my military to be.

Coilerburg will be extremely militarized, and spend a good deal more on it than is probably good for the economy as a whole (But hey, who really needs good education and high standards of living when you can huge fleets of fighter planes and warships? )

The navy and air force will receive the vast majority of the military's funding, and as a result the army will be not up to par with the land armies of other nations.

The nation will have some amphibious assault ships-I don't how many or how big, but I definitely want them.

And this is arguably the trickiest part in regards to procurement. I want a portion of my military to be flashy and high-performance but strategically questionable toys that were obtained because the dictator wanted them, not because of any real need. I'm thinking something like a handful of heavy bombers or something along those lines.

Coiler wrote:I've decided on what I want my military to be.

Coilerburg will be extremely militarized, and spend a good deal more on it than is probably good for the economy as a whole (But hey, who really needs good education and high standards of living when you can huge fleets of fighter planes and warships? )

The navy and air force will receive the vast majority of the military's funding, and as a result the army will be not up to par with the land armies of other nations.

The nation will have some amphibious assault ships-I don't how many or how big, but I definitely want them.

And this is arguably the trickiest part in regards to procurement. I want a portion of my military to be flashy and high-performance but strategically questionable toys that were obtained because the dictator wanted them, not because of any real need. I'm thinking something like a handful of heavy bombers or something along those lines.

So... you want to be a nation stuck in the middle of no where in an ocean?

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Coiler wrote:I've decided on what I want my military to be.

Coilerburg will be extremely militarized, and spend a good deal more on it than is probably good for the economy as a whole (But hey, who really needs good education and high standards of living when you can huge fleets of fighter planes and warships? )

The navy and air force will receive the vast majority of the military's funding, and as a result the army will be not up to par with the land armies of other nations.

The nation will have some amphibious assault ships-I don't how many or how big, but I definitely want them.

And this is arguably the trickiest part in regards to procurement. I want a portion of my military to be flashy and high-performance but strategically questionable toys that were obtained because the dictator wanted them, not because of any real need. I'm thinking something like a handful of heavy bombers or something along those lines.

So... you want to be a nation stuck in the middle of no where in an ocean?

Pretty much like last time?

RogueIce wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:So... you want to be a nation stuck in the middle of no where in an ocean?

Pretty much like last time?

Well, he wasn't "exactly" stuck in the middle of nowhere back then.

Rather, he nearly had Shepnukistani/Saddamistan nuclear missiles planted on his territory which happened to be within spitting distance of FUN nations in the Central Sea.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Heck, I think I’ll have a couple predreadnoughts or semi dreadnoughts around just for the hell of it, to go with all my other obsolete weapons.

"Battleship Potemkin"!

You can use it during times of revolution to shell into your own city.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Well, he wasn't "exactly" stuck in the middle of nowhere back then.

Rather, he nearly had Shepnukistani/Saddamistan nuclear missiles planted on his territory which happened to be within spitting distance of FUN nations in the Central Sea.

True. I wouldn't mind being a little isolated myself, but then I'm going with a Navy and Air Force prioritised military, so it would work well enough for me. And unlike Coiler, mine would be large enough to matter.

Last thing I want is to be annoyingly stuck in the middle of everyone (again damn it!) which is why I'm not a fan of that "cracked Pangea" world model. Is it so hard to give us some breathing room if we want it?

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Coiler wrote:I've decided on what I want my military to be.

... I'm thinking something like a handful of heavy bombers or something along those lines.

So... you want to be a nation stuck in the middle of no where in an ocean?

Ahh, Diego Garcia and Fiji rolled into one.

RogueIce wrote:Last thing I want is to be annoyingly stuck in the middle of everyone (again damn it!) which is why I'm not a fan of that "cracked Pangea" world model. Is it so hard to give us some breathing room if we want it?

But at the same time, we can put land mass between "us -n- them" just as effectively...

RogueIce wrote:True. I wouldn't mind being a little isolated myself, but then I'm going with a Navy and Air Force prioritised military, so it would work well enough for me. And unlike Coiler, mine would be large enough to matter.

Last thing I want is to be annoyingly stuck in the middle of everyone (again damn it!) which is why I'm not a fan of that "cracked Pangea" world model. Is it so hard to give us some breathing room if we want it?

Heh. Personally I'm open to geopolitical challenges, though since I am a Kingdom, this limits my ability to spend big on a navy or air force even if I go for either.

Coyote wrote:

RogueIce wrote:Last thing I want is to be annoyingly stuck in the middle of everyone (again damn it!) which is why I'm not a fan of that "cracked Pangea" world model. Is it so hard to give us some breathing room if we want it?

But at the same time, we can put land mass between "us -n- them" just as effectively...

You can, but I want some sea to play with so my CVNs and SSNs can perform, and not have to be sandwiched in by landmasses except on the extreme edges.

Wasn't one of the problems with the last game how scrunched together we were?

Beowulf wrote:Wasn't one of the problems with the last game how scrunched together we were?

Indeed, and the "cracked pangea" promises much of the same, just with some land borders for variety.

I think some space is a good thing, myself. If we get too tight again we go back to the last game of fighter/missile spam and maybe some land action. But making fleets past around destroyer size (again) totally useless.

If we are going to deal with the problem of tight straits, then we have to have oceans instead of seas separating the continents. Otherwise, we will have nothing but seas and the small distances result in most modern airliners becoming redundant.

Personally I would prefer a continent system with big oceans myself. The cracked Pangea system is too close for comfort for me as well.

Depends on how big the crack is. I'd prefer an Atlantic Ocean size "crack"

Two continents with an Atlantic sized gap would be good, and a handful of nations could allowed to be independent islands; but if we end up spread all over we’ll just be stuck in the same boat as last time. Strategic weapons will become the only way to fight once more.

What do you mean? The Atlantic is a huge enough gap, and it allows for interesting possibilities, but it's certainly not the "less than 100 km" distances we used to have.

When you have 4000-3000 km gap between nations, Navies become useful once again, and land borders mean Armies do too.

RogueIce wrote:

MariusRoi wrote:I know I probably won't be able to afford them, but I'd like a pair of lthese.

Those, in that form, didn't even exist, did they? I suppose if you really wanted those you could say you have a couple of old big gun cruisers you got off of somebody and are modernizing them. But I don't think you could just start out with them.

That's how I'd do them, and I think If I get one, I'll get just one. I've been evaluating what my nation's naval missions are and most of what I've come up with is littoral stuff, with some limited Blue-water stuff. An upgraded Alaska Class ship would be for showing the flag stuff, and as the main strategic weapon (when equipped with TLAMs).

Along with NPC Nations, it might be a good idea of having some Barbarian Land on the continents, areas that have a fair deal of resource wealth to them, but are populated by roving bands of Barbarians, basically think of the African Barbarian Militias of AK-47 and Machette armed technical riding militia thugs (not nessisarally black, of course) that are constantly at each others throughts as well as a few burnt out bombed out cities and farming towns and you have the basic idea down. Of course, said Barbarian lands would not border any Imperium, but could make a good challenge for lesser nations who might want some vassels and some military.

Zor

Zor wrote:Along with NPC Nations, it might be a good idea of having some Barbarian Land on the continents, areas that have a fair deal of resource wealth to them, but are populated by roving bands of Barbarians, basically think of the African Barbarian Militias of AK-47 and Machette armed technical riding militia thugs (not nessisarally black, of course) that are constantly at each others throughts as well as a few burnt out bombed out cities and farming towns and you have the basic idea down. Of course, said Barbarian lands would not border any Imperium, but could make a good challenge for lesser nations who might want some vassels and some military.

Zor

What? Why should the lesser nations be saddled with Third World problems while the Imperiums be potentially allowed to bully just about anyone?

I think he's saying that smaller nations should have the opportunity to conquer new lands and create satellite nations, if they're willing to expend the effort. An Imperium wouldn't really need to expand into a territory that size, and it would look like bullying if they did.