|
Is it worth it for us to put the BB's/BC in Poor condition to a Refit or not?
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 07:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
War on the Horizon Act 1.) ANTAGONIZE JAPAN AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY. 2.) Make Preparations for a War with Japan; 2A: All Obsolete DDs are to be moved back to northern Europe and moth balled during peacetime. Newer model DDs will be moved to replace them at the discretion of the Chief of the Navy 2B: The Garpun Class shall receive fire control and AA updates at the earliest available opportunity; then be moved to the far east reserve fleet to be pre positioned in the event of war with the Japanese. 2C: Grey is authorized to build 2 additional DDs per year. Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 07:57 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
Pic of Austria collapsing is broken How much are we getting in reparations and what are the options for things we can take from them
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 07:35
|
|
|
i81icu812 posted:Pic of Austria collapsing is broken They don't have anything more to take, and the peace treaty is signed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 08:01
|
|
|
Alright, one more year before we can start ordering up a CV! Just gotta get these BCs out the door and then we can get going on some new shinies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:36
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
We should probably do something about our utterly useless AVs. Not sure if CVL conversion is viable. No Fake Carriers Act The navy is to request designs to convert the Elbrus to CVL. When the design is voted on scrapping should also be a vote option. In addition the IoDHom puv should be scrapped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:We should probably do something about our utterly useless AVs. Not sure if CVL conversion is viable. Second
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
I propose Operation Unification The BBs Imperator Garpun and Vasily Legasov,, and the CVL Polyarnaya Zvezda, are to be dispatched to Northeast Asia with Sufficient escorts of our more modern destroyers to defend them. They will be placed on reserve in the region until hostilities break out with Japan or two years have passed, whichever comes first. At the conclusion of the conflict, or at the end of 2 years if no war comes, they will return to station in Northern Europe and reserve or mothball status as befits the Admiralty's judgement. Additionaly, in conflict with Japan unification of the Korean peninsula through the acquisition of south Korea will be a priority in peace negotiations
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 04:18
|
|
|
Defend Dalmatia Sufficient forces should be transferred to Dalmatia during peacetime to operate and defend the base in the event of further war. The port and it's facilities/defenses should further be upgraded to maintain a proper defensive fleet to hold it. This is less so out of necessity and moreso for prestige. We have TWICE lost it to AUSTRIA-HUNGARY. A third time the Tsarina shall have an area of Siberia frozen EXTRA for us if we don't at least make a pretense of holding onto it. The admiral is left the discretion as to what are sufficient forces to hold it and how much to reinforce it. If the area is considered far enough from our territories and isolated sufficiently as to not allow an effective defense, then considerations should be made for selling it to another power or transferring it to another's control. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 05:10
|
|
|
Infidelicious posted:War on the Horizon Act Second gently caress austria theyre so laaaame
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:We should probably do something about our utterly useless AVs. Not sure if CVL conversion is viable. seconded
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Leave Austria Alone The nation of Austria is no longer a threat, and the naval office is to treat them accordingly and no longer seek to antagonise them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
Veloxyll posted:Leave Austria Alone A. We already repealed the Annoy Austria Act so there are no current laws demanding we antagonize Austria B. Demanding we DONT antagonize Austria seems unduly constraining C. Reparation money is desperately needed to balance the budget so there are benefits to beating up people for their lunch money
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 06:51
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:We should probably do something about our utterly useless AVs. Not sure if CVL conversion is viable. Infidelicious posted:War on the Horizon Act Well, here we go again!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 08:55
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:Defend Dalmatia As for the votes: Nay and Nay
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 09:22
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Well, here we go again! Yes Yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 10:29
|
|
|
Abstain - the gently caress do I know about force composition? aye - let's batter Japan again
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
NFC - Aye WOTH - Nay
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 13:00
|
|
|
YAY x2
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Aye on No Fake Carriers (with the intent of scrapping rather than rebuilding, of course) Nay on the War on the Horizon act. We are not in any shape to fight a war at great distances from our home waters. wedgekree posted:Is it worth it for us to put the BB's/BC in Poor condition to a Refit or not? Remember that the Finish What We Start act is still in force, so it's likely to be more than a year before there is free budget to do other construction or rebuilds. EDIT: Actually, Grey Hunter: Would it be possible to get a listing of laws that are still in force with each update post? Kenlon fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Nov 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
GH, you fixed the broken image but now what I think what were meant to be AH giving up and/or having a revolt is now a duplicate image of perfidious Japan oppressing China.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
Aye Nay
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
Kenlon posted:Nay on the War on the Horizon act. We are not in any shape to fight a war at great distances from our home waters. The fleet is in the best shape it's ever been, if the Garpuns are pre positioned we can have 4 dreadnoughts on station within 4 months. Japan has been spending its money on 200,000KT of cruisers. Also finish what we start only applies to the second Skopa. Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Nov 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
Comstar posted:Yes Here we go again
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
Infidelicious posted:Also finish what we start only applies to the second Skopa. The third hull was aleays part of the BC build, and thus still is counted under the FWWS act. If I had specified that all ships must be under construction at the same time it would have crippled Grey's ability to spend any windfall budget on other things, which is why I specified two under construction at once.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
NFC - NAY It is foolish to start another rebuild on the eve of war, and given we only have one CVL,, two floatplane carriers are better than a pile of scrap and a hull in the dock WOTH - AYE The open-ended commitment to build 2 destroyers a year, with no endpoint given, was poorly done. But we do need to preposition forces in the East.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
Kenlon posted:The third hull was aleays part of the BC build, and thus still is counted under the FWWS act. If I had specified that all ships must be under construction at the same time it would have crippled Grey's ability to spend any windfall budget on other things, which is why I specified two under construction at once. Got it mixed up with a similar earlier proposal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Nay Nay
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
Aye Nay Think of the widows and the orphans! Let us avoid this terrible war and build peaceful relations for generations to come. Also a carrier, that'd be neat
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
Aye Aye
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
Aye Aye
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
Aye Aye
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
Aye, Aye
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:Is it worth it for us to put the BB's/BC in Poor condition to a Refit or not? "Poor" (unless I'm missing something) refers only to the crew quality, and is a function of the ship being placed in mothballs or extended cruising in foreign waters. A refit won't fix it. AFAIK, the only thing that suggests a refit is an "(O)" next to the ship's year of construction, which means that the machinery is getting old.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
Kickass Harpsichord posted:"Poor" (unless I'm missing something) refers only to the crew quality, and is a function of the ship being placed in mothballs or extended cruising in foreign waters. A refit won't fix it. AFAIK, the only thing that suggests a refit is an "(O)" next to the ship's year of construction, which means that the machinery is getting old. Correct. Mothball/reserve drops the crew quality. oldness is the one requiring a refit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 00:26
|
|
|
Right! this one dropped off my radar for a bit, but both acts pass, so we need a CV upgrade and a new destroyer design I guess! https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kmi0pa65zkcvgha/AAADcAoppsNhSI-9n4IUId6Ya?dl=0 Sorry!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 11:16
|
|
|
Clearly what Russia needs now is the Proyekt 12034 destroyer. Not only is it capable in battle, with eight 4" guns in high-angle twin turrets and eight torpedo tubes, it also carries a significant quantity of mines and depth charges, letting it contribute even outside of battle. Also, looking at the ship list, I'm thinking we need to start scrapping some of these old destroyers. Some of them were built in the previous century! I'll be submitting a bill for that next legislative session.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 13:39
|
|
|
Is there any restriction on what kinds of ships can benefit from the all-forward armament we just researched, could that be applied to Destroyers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
Servetus posted:Is there any restriction on what kinds of ships can benefit from the all-forward armament we just researched, could that be applied to Destroyers? I guess, but you can';t get more than 4 guns forward. 1 and 2 mounts can only rock singles. So ABXY like the Projekt is gonna get you max gunscore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2019 00:03
|
|