|
That was my guess as well, but you've gotta admit, it's a pretty Austria-Hungarian move. Looking vaguely threatening on paper but then the details show they're all from the 1905s and completely worthless. This is the country that called '3 9 inch guns' a battleship armament. They're probably all out puttering around the med, randomly exploding when someone aboard leaves the stove on.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:13 |
|
|
im more impressed they're even projecting out in the baltic go home austrians!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
Those triple turrets are going to be a godsend for future designs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
I think whats happened is we skipped over the basic triple turret tech and got improved triples straight off, like how in my France game we went right from doubles to improved quads.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
yeah, sometimes you get a really really good roll and skip several tech tiers entirely, which is always nice when it happens
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
 July 1925  It certainly looks like the Austrians have 41 coastal subs, which can't hurt us at all.  Its nightfall before the two Proyekt 33915 class cruisers spot the enemy.  We close, but when we get into range we discover this is a battlecruiser! The Katastropha's rudder is blown apart in the first few salvoes!  I then have no way the stop the Captain of the Gitara from engaging the much larger ship while not launching any torpedoes! I retreat north.  Then things get interesting the battleships are out, and not under my control they run into the enemy battlecruiser.  And sink her!  This is a good kill!  I take the prestige. August 1925  Austria-Hungary come bagging to the peace table I think we can take a quick victory here.  We take some land and victory!  Peace were declared.  We now have a foothold in the med. Reparations are good enough that I can resume building of both battleships even after the post war cuts!  With tensions low, I complete The Far East Squadron Rebasing Act, and scrap the old heavy cruisers. September 1925  We get a new fighter model. October 1925  Go away, you cowards.  Better airships are now ours. November 1925  Nine new subs it is sir!  Austria's new ships come on line to late though! December 1925  The subs are costing, but will be useful.  I'm cycling a Potemkin on and off alternating months to keep things moving.  The tensions are low, the ships are coming on, and our aircraft modern.  The fleet has returned to its slumber.  Research continues apace.  Here are our bases the new holdings came with two airfields and a airship base! We have air power in the Med. What we do with it is up to you....
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 05:47
|
|
|
How many air assets do we have and where are they deployed?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 05:56
|
|
|
Did we forget to repeal some act that forced us into an even more untenable position?  Motherland Air Force Act of 1926 Expand all the Northern European airbases to maximum capacity when the budget allows for it. Air Force Fat Trimming Act The Navy shall henceforth disband all land based air squadrons save for a skeleton crew based in Russia herself when we are at peace. The admiralty is allowed to raise new squadrons and bring existing ones to a battle ready status if the nation is about to enter war. This act will not affect any squadron based on ships even if they spend all their time on land because their ship is mothballed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 07:41
|
|
|
Danann posted:Did we forget to repeal some act that forced us into an even more untenable position? In this LP? Of course!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 09:40
|
|
|
What ships should we move to the med?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 09:58
|
|
|
Submarine Modernization Act This brief war has shown the weakness of the older coastal subs, while they have shown valiant service in the past they are clearly outdated. We should therefore scrap our 4 remaining coastal submarines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
Comstar posted:What ships should we move to the med? The ones we pointlessly scrapped  Honestly some light cruisers and DD's, then move the new Potemkin's to the med if there is a problem. Our navy now has to exist in the home sea zone of every major power on earth other than the United States, so that's great. Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Oct 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
I'm just an interested lurker here but that colony on the Med is completely surrounded by potentially hostile European powers, would be a massive pain in the rear end to try and move reinforcements to if it was threatened, and further spreads out what naval assets you have available if you try to base any of them there. Is it really viable to try and keep it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:27
|
|
|
bases like that are expendable. it is not so much about keeping it, as that it enables basing lots of ships for an extended period of time in a foreign sea zone, which is very useful for actually winning wars. i.e. if AH had sea basing in Northern Europe they might have sent more than a couple barely escorted BCs
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Plus now we maybe have invasion range on Italy. AH and Italy probably have invasion range on us too, but eh. Details. We need to steal a French or British Carribean colony so we can be all in the USA's business. Or CANADA.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:bases like that are expendable. it is not so much about keeping it, as that it enables basing lots of ships for an extended period of time in a foreign sea zone, which is very useful for actually winning wars. i.e. if AH had sea basing in Northern Europe they might have sent more than a couple barely escorted BCs Base capacity is in Dalmatia is 110 right now which is enough for a small squadron. Being over base capacity will result in ships being under supplied and eventually lead to internment in a neutral nation or scuttling if not moved to an area with sufficient support. This base will be a great staging area for commerce raiders though. The base can also be expanded for about 2,000 per year. Another thing to keep in mind is that our BBs are short ranged with cramped accommodations which means that they are unable to move to other zones in wartime so the possession in the med can't be reinforced by our capital ships during a war. Edit: Grey provided base stats in his post. Zeond fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Oct 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
Zeond posted:Keep in mind that the base can't support lots of ships unless we spend time and money upgrading the base facilities. The main fleet base for all nations start at 1,000 capacity but all other bases need to be expanded. It's not really expensive, under 2,000 per year, but it must be done for a few years in a row to be able to support any sizeable force. Right now the base capacity is probably 10 which is barely enough to support a single CA. No, different possessions have different starting base levels. You can see in one of the last screenshots in the update that Dalmatia's base level is 110, which is high enough to base a decent squadron.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:No, different possessions have different starting base levels. You can see in one of the last screenshots in the update that Dalmatia's base level is 110, which is high enough to base a decent squadron. You're right. I reviewed Grey's post after posting and was editing my post while you responded.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
Nothing getting seconded?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
I second the submarine modernisation act I also propose the older airbase act is rescinded and the more recent one used
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 07:03
|
|
|
I mean, I woulda said just bring on the next year, a mere 4 coastal subs isn't going to change much
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 09:51
|
|
|
Maybe all of the currently proposed laws are just terrible
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 10:06
|
|
|
Just checking. I'll do the next year tomorrow...
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 12:34
|
|
|
Where can we see the currently passed legislation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
I propose the Hunters in the Mediterranean Act. Solitict designs for a new class of light cruiser that is 1) long-legged and 2) faster than any ship that outguns her (which I think is ~30-31 kts at this time...this will require some research on the part of our designers). These are to be deployed as raiders, with a focus on our new Mediterranean presence. Designs may be either "heavy" light cruisers designed to fight and win against any enemy CL, or "light" light cruisers who are to run away from anything bigger than a destroyer. Obviously, the "heavy" model will be much more expensive; it will be up to the designers to balance cost and capability, and up to the legislature to decide which better fits our needs. Danann posted:Did we forget to repeal some act that forced us into an even more untenable position? second both of these bewbies fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Oct 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I propose the Hunters in the Mediterranean Act. Seconded.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
If you want to kill cruisers you should build BCs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 02:35
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:If you want to kill cruisers you should build BCs. absolutely, please do not design ACs we just scrapped those for a reason
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 03:41
|
|
|
Bed in the Med our recently acquired base in the Mediterranean is to be expanded. The airbase should be left to the current size, but the port facilities hsould be expanded over at least one level/tier per year. Also at least one level of coastal batteries should be placed there. This ensures in the event that we are hemmed in the Med, it can support our forces there and minimizes the loss of ships if the Med is cut off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:01
|
|
|
Danann posted:Did we forget to repeal some act that forced us into an even more untenable position? bewbies posted:I propose the Hunters in the Mediterranean Act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:17
|
|
|
yeaaaa boi yeaaaaa boi nawh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:19
|
|
|
Yeah Yeah Yeah
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:25
|
|
|
Aye Aye Aye
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
Nay Nay Nay
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 05:53
|
|
|
Nay Nay Aye
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 08:49
|
|
|
Aye Aye Nay
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
Aye Nay Nay
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 12:22
|
|
|
Motherland Air Force - Nay, that's really expensive and the budget can't allow for it now, better to propose something like that when we have the money so Grey doesn't forget. Also, there's not actually a need to have an airbase at every single base. Air Force Fat Trimming - Nay, putting squadrons in reserve is one thing but disbanding them is really counterproductive. Hunters - Nay, we're spending our budget on top priorities right now and can think about what else we need once those are finished.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 12:29
|
|
|
Nay to all. For now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 12:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:13 |
|
|
Yes Yes No
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2019 12:59
|
|