STGOD! OOC Thread.

[frigidmagi]

Any STGOD comments can go here.

[Cynical Cat]

Are those starting point values correct? From reading it a single battleship costs 180pts and you start with less than a thousand to spend. That's unreasonably tiny.

[Silence]

Never mind, I'll stick with the original claims, it seems more interesting and challenging.

[Screwball]

So, I take it the requirements, bonuses and penalties for taking high ranks in various categories have been abolished?

[Steve]

Okay, let's start this again (my post I mean) because I see that you listed starting costs and industrial costs separately.

First off, what do you intend with naval reserves? Ships in mothballs?

Secondly, ship starting costs are way too expensive. Seriously, only a 5SML country can even have six basic battleships at start, "upgrades" not counting, and that's if it spends almost all of its points! Frankly a large standing navy could have as much as 4-5 times that number in battleships alone - 20 BBs conservatively, with an equal or greater number of cruisers and maybe 6 or more destroyers per BB.

[Academia Nut]

In consideration of the reserves, perhaps a doubling or even tripling of the SML might be in order. Also, for the ships, perhaps it could be said that cap ships are in dry-dock/being used as trainers while escorts are assigned to patrol duties or something and don't have a full war load out and might fight at maybe only half efficiency or something until full mobilized? Just a thought though.

Also, would it be fair to be able to punt points from SML down into reserves (but obviously not the other way around) if you say have a point or two rattling around in SML and you're off by one or two points in your reserves from getting another ship or fighter group?

[Steve]

Secondly, ship starting costs are way too expensive. Seriously, only a 5SML country can even have six basic battleships at start, "upgrades" not counting, and that's if it spends almost all of its points! Frankly a large standing navy could have as much as 4-5 times that number in battleships alone - 20 BBs conservatively, with an equal or greater number of cruisers and maybe 6 or more destroyers per BB.

I've thought of a solution to this. Make them squadrons. When you buy a "battleship" unit as in the list, you're not buying a single vessel but a squadron of them, say 5 for battleships, 6 for cruisers, and 10 for escorts/destroyers . You spend that 180 in your starting points for five vessels then, so just three expenditures of such gives you a respectable fleet of 15 battleships.

As for carriers, either throw in the cost of the airwing in or reduce the cost of a carrier to reflect you're not buying four but one. Unless people want to go the way of saying you're buying that number of carriers too, but a carrier-intensive fleet isn't really useful until air tech gets to 1940+ level.

[Hadrianvs]

I've thought of a solution to this. Make them squadrons. When you buy a "battleship" unit as in the list, you're not buying a single vessel but a squadron of them, say 5 for battleships, 6 for cruisers, and 10 for escorts/destroyers.

That's going to throw the relative costs way off. I think we're just short on both industrial and starting points. If I could amend one thing at this point. It'd be that: needs more points. If I could amend two things, then I'd add some thing about bonus industry at full mobilization, since at that time production of consumer products is switched over to production war materiel.

In deference to Magi's call that I've been metaphorically shot, I will say nothing more about the rules.

(and Magi, please don't take PMs I sent you at 4:30 am too seriously)

[General Havoc]

I have a question concerning reserves:

Is it possible to make a partial callup of Reserves? If instead of mobilizing my entire reserve forces, can I mobilize only half of them, for instance, and thus extend the time I have to use them in before everything degenerates?

[Steve]

I've thought of a solution to this. Make them squadrons. When you buy a "battleship" unit as in the list, you're not buying a single vessel but a squadron of them, say 5 for battleships, 6 for cruisers, and 10 for escorts/destroyers.

That's going to throw the relative costs way off. I think we're just short on both industrial and starting points. If I could amend one thing at this point. It'd be that: needs more points. If I could amend two things, then I'd add some thing about bonus industry at full mobilization, since at that time production of consumer products is switched over to production war materiel.

In deference to Magi's call that I've been metaphorically shot, I will say nothing more about the rules.

(and Magi, please don't take PMs I sent you at 4:30 am too seriously)

Honestly, destroyers are still too expensive in this system relative to scale. Battleship costs work if you're permitted to spread them out over 6-9 sessions, representing a realistic 2-3 year build time.

[frigidmagi]

Alright, I've been at work all day. So if you sent me a PM, sorry if I didn't reply.

The price of battleships is a mistake. I meant 90. I'll change that. If that is still to expensive I'll downgrade slightly.

As for changing any of the rules or such? No. The answer is no. I'm sorry if that offends anyone but has Ac Nut has pointed out we've been dancing around for 6 weeks. And frankly it was about 5 or 6 players... Out of 17! That means about 11 people were just sitting around waiting for the game to start... For a month and a half. I have no doubt that in the next month some of you will come up with ideas that are amazing improvements. But, we're not using them this game. The rules tinkering for STGOD I is over. Feel free to play with ideas and such but they will not be implemented until the next STGOD.

[The Cleric]

I'll get my posts up as soon as I'm able, which should be Monday. Christmas is busy at work but I can make 1 post a week no problem. I'll probably hash out specifics over AIM and such. Did we ever finalize the boundaries between my African area and Ethiopia?

[frigidmagi]

I do like the squadron idea.

[Charon]

I'll get my posts up as soon as I'm able, which should be Monday. Christmas is busy at work but I can make 1 post a week no problem. I'll probably hash out specifics over AIM and such. Did we ever finalize the boundaries between my African area and Ethiopia?

I said you could keep all of your current colonies in Africa. What was the year that we agreed on for the war? It was in the 1800's right? If so I'd like to suggest the war ended in 1855 or so.

For the game, I will be able to post starting Monday, my OOB won't be up until Tuesday or so though.

[Marcao]

Alright, I've been at work all day. So if you sent me a PM, sorry if I didn't reply.

The price of battleships is a mistake. I meant 90. I'll change that. If that is still to expensive I'll downgrade slightly.

As for changing any of the rules or such? No. The answer is no. I'm sorry if that offends anyone but has Ac Nut has pointed out we've been dancing around for 6 weeks. And frankly it was about 5 or 6 players... Out of 17! That means about 11 people were just sitting around waiting for the game to start... For a month and a half. I have no doubt that in the next month some of you will come up with ideas that are amazing improvements. But, we're not using them this game. The rules tinkering for STGOD I is over. Feel free to play with ideas and such but they will not be implemented until the next STGOD.

I agree with you that we should not be changing rules at this time. I am a relatively late joiner into the game, but I am familiar with the back and forth on the rules and as such, I support this iteration. However, what I would like to see is some minor tweaks to the numbers involved not the fundamental rules themselves. Firstly, the numbers under military have to increase significantly if we want to have even remotely balanced armies. 1200 points as it stands now is not enough, doubling or even tripling that amount may be in line.

As much as I like the idea of squadrons (and why should I not, I plan on having a navy) I don't believe it is a fair gesture to other nations that do not have plans to start out with a navy. Case in point, if Pacifica (the eminient naval power out of need in game) gets a squadron of 4 escorts for 10 points, that is equivalent to 2 regular division of men for a land locked nation (like Cyncat). I think that increasing the military numbers and adjusting some prices around is a more equitable and fair solution to all involved.

batteships being 90 pounds is definately a positive thing (180 was crazy imo) but using 90 points as a base and using second line battleship rules means that these are worth 54 points. A current generation cruiser is worth 60. Does this not severely reduce the appeal of cruisers? Why would I want a cruiser when I can have an old battleship that even with -40% effeciency will probably triumph versus a modern cruiser. Am I wrong in following this logic?

In summation. I think that doubling or tripling the military numbers from 1200 to 2400 or 3600 will ultimately allow the players to craft more well rounded armies and will address this in a non-biased manner. The points for a battleship have to be moved upwards slightly or the cost of cruisers reduced, if current generation cruisers are to remain attractive when compared to previous generation battleships.

[Steve]

Technically a cruiser should have superior cruising range and speed to a battleship, the entire concept of them beyond being flag vessels for destroyer squadrons was the capability to operate further from base than battleships.

Though without a Washington Naval Treaty-equivalent we're not likely to see "heavy cruisers" at all; cruiser design would instead likely evolve into the "Large Cruiser", something like the WWI-era Furious pre-carrier conversion or the WWII Alaska.

I'm not arguing for changing rules either, but rather tweaking what we have after a few "trial runs", players making up OrBats and posting the results so we can see where tweaks are needed.

[Screwball]

Um, I've just sat down to do my numbers, and found that the 'Industry' section appears t have vanished, and been absorbed into the 'Economy' section. Is that a mistake as a result of an edit, or intentional?

[Steve]

As an example of said needed tweaking, a force I drew up assuming SML of 3, and note that SML is my acronym for Standing Military Limit:

263 Starting points to Army
2 Guard Corps, 6 Elite Divisions 90 points, 3 artillery regiments 9 points, 6 engineer regiments 12 points, and 3 Light Tank brigades 15 points attached = 126 points
2 Motorized Corps, 6 Motorized Divisions 90 points, 2 artillery regiments 6 points, 4 Elite Infantry Regiments 12 points, 1 Heavy Tank regiment 10 points, 2 Light Tank brigades 10 points, 1 AA Artillery 3 points, and 2 engineer regiments 6 points attached = 137 points

Initial desire was 250 point expenditure

440 Starting points to Navy
Assuming Battleship points are for squadrons:
1 BB Squad: 90 points + Anti-Capital w/ no penalty 30 points + Anti-Air w/ no penalty 10 points + Superior Protection w/ no penalty 20 points = 150 points
1 BB Squad: 90 points + Anti-Capital w/ no penalty 30 points + Superior protection w/ speed penalty 10 points = 130 points
1 CV (Cruiser) Squad = 60 points
1 Cruiser Squad = 60 points
4 Escort Squads = 40 points

Initial desire was 400 point expenditure


93 Starting points to Air Force

10 Fighter Groups 50 points + 4 Air Defense Upgrades 20 points + 4 Long Range upgrades 8 points = 78 points
1 Bomber Group 10 points + 1 Ground attack Upgrade 5 points = 15 points

Initial desire was 150 point expenditure

796 points total

Basically, 12 really good divisions with plenty of attachments as a national "striking arm", 10 battleships, 4 cruiser-sized CVs, 6 cruisers, and 40 destroyers, with no subs nor upgrades save the BBs - I presumed one squad was of brand-new 1927-laid vessels and one was of 1923 or 1920 generation with the fewer upgrades, and a fighter-heavy air force. I could conceivably cut a couple fighter groups for an extra bomber group, maybe cut one of the fighter upgrades for the points needed for the second bomber group to also have ground attack upgrade.

For a 3SML country?

Now, you might say "But Steve, if you cut that elite army force in half you get 3 normal infantry divisions per cut good division". Fine. Let's say I have only motorized forces, no guards: I now have a grand total of 24 divisions. 240,000 troops, maybe 300,000+ when counting the engineers and artillery and tanks as well as the motorized forces being half-strength in combat manpower. For an army that small I would expect being able to field a Navy of 2-3 times the one that the majority of my points gave me.

Oh, I could trim my air force further. Cut a pair of fighter groups and use them to, ooh, buy a destroyer squadron or a couple sub squadrons.

Could dump the bonuses to my battleships... which means my ships are effectively the equivalent of WNT-world vessels that are lighter and less powerful. Doing so would buy me a more respectable army perhaps, or a whole extra battleship squadron. Of equally inferior vessels.

You get 400 more points with SML 5, yeah. Which would allow me to have a more respectable force, but such requires you to sacrifice population, economy, infrastructure, industry... stuff that lets you have reserves or which lets you keep up with others.

But let's try it.

335 Starting points to Army
2 Guard Corps, 6 Elite Divisions 90 points, 3 artillery regiments 9 points, 6 engineer regiments 12 points, and 3 Light Tank brigades 15 points attached = 126 points
2 Motorized Corps, 6 Motorized Divisions 90 points, 2 artillery regiments 6 points, 4 Elite Infantry Regiments 12 points, 1 Heavy Tank regiment 10 points, 2 Light Tank brigades 10 points, 1 AA Artillery 3 points, and 2 engineer regiments 6 points attached = 137 points
4 Infantry Corps, 12 Infantry Divisions 60 points, 2 artillery regiments 6 points, 2 engineer regiments 6 points = 72 points

Initial desire was 300 point expenditure

755 Starting points to Navy
Assuming Battleship points are for squadrons:
1 BB Squad: 90 points + Anti-Capital w/ no penalty 30 points + Anti-Air w/ no penalty 10 points + Superior Protection w/ no penalty 20 points = 150 points
1 BB Squad: 90 points + Anti-Capital w/ no penalty 30 points + Superior protection w/ speed penalty 10 points = 130 points
1 BB Squad: 90 points + Anti-Capital w/ speed penalty 15 points = 105 points
1 CV (Cruiser) Squad = 60 points
1 Cruiser Squad + 1 Scout Upgrade 5 points = 65 points
10 Escort Squads 80 points + 4 Anti-Sub w/ air attack penalty 40 points + Anti-Sub w/ no penalty 80 points = 220 points
5 Sub Squads = 25 points

Initial desire was 700 point expenditure


110 Starting points to Air Force

10 Fighter Groups 50 points + 4 Air Defense Upgrades 20 points = 70 points
3 Bomber Groups 30 points + 2 Ground attack Upgrade 10 points = 40 points

Initial desire was 200 point expenditure

0 points remaining

Had to dump the Long Range upgrades for fighters to fit 1200. Added 2 more Bomber groups, 1 with a Ground Attack upgrade. 12 more infantry divisions with 4 attachments (1 per Corps really) for another 140,000-150,000 combat troops. As for the Navy, got to add subs and more DDs, with upgrades for both, and an extra squadron of minimal upgrade BBs for 15 total (initially wanted a second added squadron, but of course said killed any hope of army improvement).

Note that in neither case did I allot points for the four carrier wings, though I have enough air unit points alloted for such as it'd be 16+ points (the minimal number presuming all Multi-Role squadrons).

And this is with an additional two points spent in SML, forcing me to sacrifice Infrastructure (mobilization speed and air reserve), Industry (future construction capability, as well as R&D capacity and nav reserve), Economy (mobilization time), or population (army reserve). Or it forces me to make Frig redraw the damned map.

As for Reserves, while useful in wartime they also, by mod order, take time to set up and even partial activations start ticking the clock toward, y'know, economic meltdown.

Therefore, honestly, we need to consider price reductions and/or point increases. And consider that my draw-ups presume squadrons for ships, not individual ships as Frig initially wrote. My SML5 drawup should probably be an SML 3-equivalent use of points, since an SML5 state would be a heavily militarized one with a standing army of a million or so men - the equivalent of 1,000 normal infantry divisions as dictated in-game - without reserve activation.

Also, Frig, how I should emulate my Large Cruiser concept in-game, since it's too light and under-gunned to be a BB but is heavier than a cruiser with cruiser speed (33-34 knots), cruiser range (10,000 nautical miles at 18 knots), and superior armor and firepower to cruisers (10"+ belt instead of 5-7", 10" guns instead of 6"-8"). Also, two things on Reserves:

A) What point cost would I get for "activating" reserve units in terms of simply training their personnel to join the active peace time army, but not in a full mobilization? I'd think it should be cheaper than a new unit, half time to usefulness (reflecting activation training being shorter), but it cuts down the mobilization pool and only so many can be activated in peacetime.

B) What point cost for creating a new reserve unit? A paper division, essentially, to add to my reserve pool?

Edit: Dur, I forgot that the LR upgrade for fighters was 2 and the 8 I put down represented 4 upgrades. To fit 1,200 points in SML5 I had to completely dump those upgrades.

[Steve]

Um, I've just sat down to do my numbers, and found that the 'Industry' section appears t have vanished, and been absorbed into the 'Economy' section. Is that a mistake as a result of an edit, or intentional?

Mistake I think, he just forgot to put "Industry".

[Slacker]

Ships need to become cheaper relative to mans with rifles. At least as a starting expenditure-maybe lower the initial purchase costs for navy/air force significantly but keep them at the higher cost for in-game purchases?

[Steve]

I don't think the air costs are that bad: 10 points for 48 bombers or 5 for 96 fighters?

I just think that A) the land units are a tad overpriced (guard infantry should probably only be 10 points, and for a 15 point motorized division you should get a full-strength 10,000 man unit) and B) ships are rather overpriced for starting units, even if you take the costs as by squadron and not by individual vessel. At the very least the SML point allocations should be raised: 1200 or so for SML 3, 1800-2000 for SML 5.

[Steve]

Well, we saw the system doesn't work too well if you want a Navy, but let's presume you're only interested in some coastal ships. Some old battleships, thus -40% cost, and cruisers, coastal subs, and DDs. No upgrades. Let's say you're mostly concerned with army.

SML 3: 800 points

Navy:
1 old BB Squad 90 points * .6 = 54 points
1 Cruiser Squadron = 60 points
3 Escort Squads = 30 points
3 Sub Squads = 15 points

159 points overall

Air Force:

Let's shoot for 150 overall here.

4 Fighter Groups w/ Long Range = 28 points
6 Fighter Groups w/ Air Defense = 60 points
4 Bomber Groups w/ Ground attack = 60 points

148 overall.

This leaves us 493 points to spend on Army.

Let's assume a high-quality army, with motorized and armored assets. Three Guard Corps, 3 Guard divisions each.

9 Guard Divisions = 135 points
12 Motorized Divisions = 180 points
2 Light Armored Divisions = 40 points

We're at 355 points now, 138 left.
Now for a "bulk" force:

15 Infantry Divisions = 75 points

63 left now. Just enough for, say, 10 artillery regiments of various kinds for 30 points, another 4 anti-tank and anti-air regiments for 12 more points, 42 total, and the last 21 points can be taken up by 7 engineer regiments.

10 Arty = 30 points
2 AA Arty = 6 points
2 AT Arty = 6 points
7 Engineers = 21 points

493 overall.

0 points left

So in summation we have 90,000 infantry in guard divisions, another 60,000 in motorized formations, 14,000 combat engineers, 150,000 regulars, and in the two armored divisions another 4,000 regulars plus, say, 6 men per tank (counting a couple replacements along with a 4 man main crew) for 1,200 men per division, or 2,400 overall. 320,400 troops standing forces.

So say 400,000+ troops overall when counting the personnel in the arty regiments/brigades. 500,000 if you add an engineer regiment and 10 more infantry divisions by dumping the coastal BBs. This would actually be a respectable starting army, I grant. Maybe even a bit on the big side. You just have to accept an anemic navy of 24 subs, 24 destroyers, 6 cruisers, and 5 old BBs, none of them particularly excellent, going by my suggested quantities for ships per squadron type. SML5 would give us 400 more points to spend and, if we're an army-centric build, done a certain way it could even exceed a million men.

As such, arguably we could cut navy costs further, but I think raising SML some would work as well. Meet halfway and all. Maybe 500 for SML1, 750 for SML 2, 1,000 for SML3, 1,250 for SML4, and 1,500 for SML5, with a slight reduction in navy costs? I'll gladly run the numbers on a few alternative cost models and point models if asked.

Finally, Frig, I'm not trying to be condemnatory, I just want to show where the numbers don't add up well so we can tweak said numbers, not throw out the whole ruleset.

[frigidmagi]

Alright, we will be doubling the military points. That should help.

[Hadrianvs]

Why are things twice as expensive to build in game? It seems to give a lopsided advantage to highly militarized powers and leave the ones who invested in industry out in the cold.

[Steve]

Probably to reflect that the old stuff is already built.