Treaty Limits

[halfmanhalfsquidman]

I assume that the campaign will include something like the treaty limits of the Washington and London Naval Treaties as that would add a level of compromise in making designs and your support/opposition ofit as a Naval Minister could be an interesting gameplay decision. Think Treay/Fleet factions in Japan in the 20s and 30s where some officers believed Japan could not have the industrial capacity to keep up with the US vs the desire to be recognized as an equal on the world stage. I think there should also be options to "cheat" on the treaties with some sort of raising of tensions or abrogating the treaty if you get caught. 

In the mean time, I think introducing treaty limits in the custom battle menu would be fun too. Makes for a reason to have 8" cruisers and you could more accurately recreate some historical battles like River Plate or Java Sea. Thoughts?

[Reaper Jack]

I imagine after the first in game 'Great War' (remember conflicts are dynamic) we will have the option of convening treaties such as Washington and London. With further options for things resembling the Anglo-German Naval Agreement and cheating on the treaties, along with things like the Escalator Clause. (Allowed bigger ships and 406mm/16 inch guns if a nation left the treaty, this historically happened with Japan in the late 30's.) 

[akd]

Would be fun if it were a negotiation mini-game, rather than just having a historical or random treaty imposed (although that might be your lot as head of the Navy).

[RedParadize]

Yeah, I am curious to see what they will do with WW1&2 and other historic even. If they go for historical even then there will be huuuge gap where nothing will happen. I think RtW formula was pretty sweet.

[arkhangelsk]

First, I support anything that increases our control of the Custom Battle feature, and surely this would not take a lot of code - they have already redded-out certain tonnages in the Custom Battle system anyway, so this would be just adding one more red bar.

I think some kind of Treaty negotiation would be fun. For example, if I'm playing Japan, it would be nice if there is something I can do to say ... increase the tonnage % to 80% instead of 60%. Maybe assisting in wars could help in that? Or maybe we can present reasoning, such as:

"The British ambassador proposes a limit to cruisers of 10000 tons. What do you say?

A. We accept

B. Are you kidding? You can't build cruisers worth a darn on that! You need at least (Player Enters Number) tons!"

C. Why limit the weight to begin with?"

[Cptbarney]

Also the options to turn treaties off or make custom ones based on certain values and attributes.

[Accipiter]

since the devs described the campaign as you playing as the Navy Admiral, not the Nation's leader (for exemple: you can't declare wars yourself directly), it whould make sence you'll ultimately not have full control over the negociations and the final call of weather your nation sign or not, nor be able to decide yourself to whidraw from a signed treaty either.

yet, it also stands to reason that as the admiral, the nation's leader whould obviously ask your opinion and listen to you, trying to get something as close to what you asked in the negociations, so you should be able to have some influence over the terms. some kind of mini game that goes over several rounds of negociations like the peace treaties in Hearts of Iron 4 could be very fun and original. or at least multi-choice options like arkhangelsk is saying, that whould be really a cool feature.

i whould like such choices or events to happen -VERY- frequently during campaign too, so you can influence the AI of your nation's politics and land army rather than having them just do their random own thing with no coordination with you.

one exemple of such an event:

"the army Marshall is planning a large amphibious landing at "X location" and believe opening this new front could be decisive to winning the war. they are inquiring how confident you are the Navy could gain control of the nearby sea region, and maintain control of it for the following weeks to keep the supply line open, all the while also keeping ships continually on station and available for shore bombardment missions in support of the operation"

A : "Extremely confident" (increase probablilities your Army AI will do it)

B : "This plan seems risky" (avereage probability your Army AI will do it)

C : "I advise against it" (decrease probabilities your Army AI will do it)

Edited December 24, 2019 by Accipiter

[arkhangelsk]

1 hour ago, Accipiter said:

I would like such choices or events to happen -VERY- frequently during campaign too, so you can influence the AI of your nation's politics and land army rather than having them just do their random own thing with no coordination with you.

Cool, but perhaps we can beat the Jones-es (Rule the Waves) by adding a feature that I don't think they have yet - scenarios where your tactical choices can directly affect diplomacy.

For example, an unrefusable battle suddenly pops up in the strategic screen. You enter into the tactical screen, and you see, perhaps 4000m away, 3 "??". And clicking on them reveals a patch of water (the ship model is concealed, unlike now where it often gives the game away) with maybe a wake or some lights. Could it be a torpedo boat or is it a fishing boat? If it is a TB what is its nationality. Maybe it is a neutral's torpedo boat. Do you wait for the ID bar to reach 100%, or do you try to gain advantage by opening fire as soon as you see them? And the torpedo warner just went on ... but you can't find the wakes for yourself - real or false? Maybe you can rule out they are torpedo boats because you can see (for yourself, not with the computer telling you) it is crawling through the water. But you could still be wrong.

Another one might even involve your light forces being actually shot at by another nation (perhaps because they had a navigation failure and are in its waters, or your cruiser happened to be in a warzone). Can you extract your light ships without damaging the enemy ships, and if you have to damage them did you sink them? It might, of course, also be a treacherous attack by a really hostile nation.

By the way, just to avoid the Save/Load method, the computer does not commit to an answer until A) It opens fire or B) you identify it. So even within a S/L one time you could have seen British fishing boats and another time Japanese torpedo boats..

Obviously, getting these things wrong increases tension or might even lead to war. Sometimes, you may have to choose to "eat" the loss of a small ship rather than risk inciting tensions, and so on.