Lets talk about Spain:

[SiWi]

Hi,

Given that the campaign is hopefully less then a month away, I was starting to think about which nation to play first.

I was reading this interesting Article (linked by @DougToss I believe) talking about the different nations situations in RTW:

https://jasonlefkowitz.net/2016/05/a-brief-consideration-of-various-strategic-problems-in-rule-the-waves/

There are however some Nations missing there, which are announced for UAD (https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/the-playing-modes), namely China and Spain.

 

So I though that maybe we can take a look together at the 2 or at least the one in this thread name: Spain.

Economy and Research:

While we obviously don't have exact numbers for the game, I think it will be save to assume that your budget won't match any of the greater powers and research wise you will lack behind. 

The Game starts at 1890 and this is what the world looks like:

 

As one can see, Spain has quite a few Possessions still around the world. 

In Africa, the Caribbean and Philippians.

I would argue that is terrible.

Because it means that you can end up fighting EVERYONE, even Japan, Austria and Italy.

Hell historical speaking, they fought the US in 1898, merely 8 years after the game starts.  And I think it is save to say, that they have not the budget to fight off at all fronts.

 

So what should one do? Well first I would suggest to make a choice what to keep and what to lose:

The Homeland must be defend so that is a given.

Africa: while maybe not as important, it has the decency of being close to the homeland and hence can profit alot from the fleet station there.

The Caribbean (aka Cuba): while I assume that those a quite valuable provinces, I think I would "let them go".

Because not only are France and Britain there, which are dangerous and but even worse the USA is near.

France and UK dance on many other parties as well and hence will hopefully not be too concerned with attack you (at least once AI nations can fight each other in the game). But with the US you have potential enemy there with almost nothing else to do, then kicking you. I mean in theory they could take on France and UK but I think that is rather unlikely. And unlike France and Uk, who probably will have the best fleets elsewhere, the US will have probably half of its best ship on the east coast. And even with relative short ranges, they can probably deploy most of it against you. Meaning you will face the BB's there while its not very likely you yourself have many BB's there.

So... my advice would be: abandon them. I don't think you have a chance in hell to hold them, if the US comes knocking. Even if "only" France or Uk comes knocking, you will be in trouble. 

Sure I mean in theory if you remain strong there you would have a chance to expand there but I find this unlikely. 

 

Philippians: probably also a good province to have economy wise.

Now Philippians has partly the same problems that the Caribbean have: almost everyone is in reach to fight you. Yet in this case, I think one can hold on to them. Unlike the Caribbean, Indonesia is have a better situation when it comes to enemies.

Sure both Japan and China are relative close with there homelands. UK strong in the area as well, even Germany there and Russia not compeltly out of reach either.

But unlike the USA in the Caribbean,  all of those power could have better things to do, then fighting you. Also they will probably not deploy they best fleets against you. This should give you are fighting chance to hold them off. 

 

Now I want to talk about what kind of ships will probably make sense, starting with the categories of 1890:

BB:

I don't imaging you having the money to have too many BB's, so you may want to be careful to what build with them and what for. Given that your homeland can be targeted by at least 5 other great powers (Germany, France, UK, Italy and Austria Hungary), I think one needs a powerful force in spain itself to defend the home land. For that purpose a group of coastal defense BB#s may be the best solution. Being short range and maybe slower, gives you extra displacement to add in raw fighting power (guns or armor) compensation lack of technology, at least a bit. 

Now when that is done (and of course updated once in a while) and you still have something left, you maybe can have middle or even long range BB's to fight/guard in one of your possessions far from home, but I don't see you having the money as spain to have too many BB's (historical they had 3). So I think other ship types will have to place the burden there.

Heavy (armored) Cruisers:

I think these will be your most important ships. You can realistically have a numbers of them and still give them a good range, that they can fight overseas, while you perhaps mange to make them dangerous to even older enemy BB's.

So while you maybe want a heavier version for the homeland, I think you could build them with longer ranges and better speed to sever as main defense force, for your oversea areas. Perhaps you leave it at one version (at the time) so you have a force to react to crisis. 

This shiptype is the best bet you have to fight off enemies at the far east or west and maybe even go into the offensive yourself. 

light Cruisers:

Probably good for long distance patrols and perhaps also more destined to defend your territories abroad. When you mange a good Torpedo armament (I think that they should take priority in research, given that they can equalize the score somewhat even difficult to use).

TB (later DD's):

I'm really torn on those. Testing today suggest that you can destroy enemy BB's, even with better tech (they were 1905, I was 1900) and hence could be a great equalizer and defense force.Otherwise, early torpedoes are terrible and they will take loses against pretty much any ship type.  There is also the question, how you can deploy them overseas.

Can they travel the distance from spain to Cuba? If yes, they may be a way to fight off the US in Cuba or defend your other possessions relative cheaply.

If not, then they probably a way to safeguard spain from its many enemies. Relative cheap to build and replaceable, they could fight of France, Italian or whoever else comes, BBs and crusier and land the lucky hits which turn the tide. 

 

BC:

Probably not a great idea to build glass cannons. you won't be able to replace loses easily and while they maybe give you firepower needed, I feel that you can't afford to risk a "jutland" and see half of 3 year budgets blow up in 2-3 minutes or thou. 

 

 

 

 

Those are anyhow my thoughts about Spain, what are yours?

Edited June 10, 2020 by SiWi

[Aceituna]

Well Spain will probably be the first nation i will play as (at least if it will be playable in the first campaing version) because to me it seems really challenging.

About those territories that should be hold: I think that this dependes on where you want to expand. I would personally prefer totally reverse approach (prefer Cuba over other territories) because I would like to put restoring of the spanish sphere of influence in Southern America as my main goal(mainly because of oil in Venezuela) but this would totally depend on the outcome of American-Spanish war. 

Ship types: This mainly depends on your personal naval doctrine. For example i am big fan of commerce raiders and submarine warfare. So i'll probably build some BC's and big submarine fleetwhile try to avoid regular battles with enemy fleet and building battleships will be at the end of list of my preferences. And for coastal defence i'll probably choose combination of torpedo boats and naval forts (if they will be in game) coastal defence battleships just always seemed to me like waste of money but it's probably just me. 

Edited May 31, 2020 by Aceituna

[SiWi]

Personal I was first thinking Germany (I'm German so I'm a bit bias) but now tend to think USA or UK, since I first want to learn "the ropes" of the campaign. 

 

My Problem with Cuba is that the US is too close to comfort, and while you maybe have a chance to win a war against them early, I don't think you will have a chance when they should come back in the 20 or 30s.

And given all the other possible wars you can be in, I don't see how one can have enough forces there, even thou a return of the Spanish empire in Latin america looks attractive. 

 

Subs sound like a type which are expensive and come in late in the game, hence I'm not sure how much use they will be.

BC could be an alternative to BB's, to give one access to big guns but I'm skeptical if they aren't too valuable to attacks. Perhaps building them fast enough to always chose the engagement would be the key.

 

One factor I forgot are mines: they could be really be your friend when in the defense. 

[Aceituna]

11 minutes ago, SiWi said:

Personal I was first thinking Germany (I'm German so I'm a bit bias) but now tend to think USA or UK, since I first want to learn "the ropes" of the campaign. 

 

My Problem with Cuba is that the US is too close to comfort, and while you maybe have a chance to win a war against them early, I don't think you will have a chance when they should come back in the 20 or 30s.

And given all the other possible wars you can be in, I don't see how one can have enough forces there, even thou a return of the Spanish empire in Latin america looks attractive. 

 

Subs sound like a type which are expensive and come in late in the game, hence I'm not sure how much use they will be.

BC could be an alternative to BB's, to give one access to big guns but I'm skeptical if they aren't too valuable to attacks. Perhaps building them fast enough to always chose the engagement would be the key.

 

One factor I forgot are mines: they could be really be your friend when in the defense. 

About the problem with US too close: It's probably too early to make so detailed plans but in the blog about campaing there is mentioned that naval treaties may occure. So if player would play as Spain and then defeat US he might be able to force US to limit size of their fleet through such a treaty which might prevent their comeback.

About subs: According to blog: subs will be expensive to research but their building will be quite cheap. And we don't know if they come early or late. Spain already had electric-powered submarine in 1890 so maybe Spain will start with one sub. Or maybe they will become available since karosene-powered subs or even diesel-electrics. I asked this question some time ago on forum but there was no reply.

I made quite a lot of tests with building raiders in custom battles to discover which type is the best for such a role. It came out that if you want to build vessel that has: very long range, armor strong enough to avoid sinking by armed transports and fast enough to avoid engagements with enemy BB's then BC is by far the best choice.

Mines also didn't come to my mind but of course they might have a big role (especially if you are on budget) but on the blog is written that they will be automatically occuring around enemy shores so they probably can't be used for defence of own shore.

[SiWi]

5 minutes ago, Aceituna said:

About the problem with US too close: It's probably too early to make so detailed plans but in the blog about campaing there is mentioned that naval treaties may occure. So if player would play as Spain and then defeat US he might be able to force US to limit size of their fleet through such a treaty which might prevent their comeback.

About subs: According to blog: subs will be expensive to research but their building will be quite cheap. And we don't know if they come early or late. Spain already had electric-powered submarine in 1890 so maybe Spain will start with one sub. Or maybe they will become available since karosene-powered subs or even diesel-electrics. I asked this question some time ago on forum but there was no reply.

I made quite a lot of tests with building raiders in custom battles to discover which type is the best for such a role. It came out that if you want to build vessel that has: very long range, armor strong enough to avoid sinking by armed transports and fast enough to avoid engagements with enemy BB's then BC is by far the best choice.

Mines also didn't come to my mind but of course they might have a big role (especially if you are on budget) but on the blog is written that they will be automatically occuring around enemy shores so they probably can't be used for defence of own shore.

I doubt that you can force the US into a treaty limting they fleet enough to be safe, since the technology gab will probably eat you. I also assume that those are more general speaking limiting displacement, aka everone doesn't build 37K + displacement and so on, not just one nation. Other wise one can easily elimate one fleet "forever".

Well they were kinda ready in WW1, thou only really worked well in WW2, which would be quite late in game.

That does sound plausible thou I wonder what you do when enemy fleet directly attack you own TP or ports or whatever. I can't quite see the BC be too helpful there. And big navies could probably have alot of crusiers to defend their convoys, but we will see.

I read that differently: every nation, including yours, deploys mines in wartime.

[Aceituna]

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

I doubt that you can force the US into a treaty limting they fleet enough to be safe,

It's probably too early to discuss this but I think that such a treaty would depend on the amount of victory points that was gained during war (so  for example such a treaty might be possible only if US navy was decisively defeated and their economy crippled by naval blockade)

 

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

I also assume that those are more general speaking limiting displacement, aka everone doesn't build 37K + displacement and so on, not just one nation.

This point is not really clear in the blog. It says: 

Victory points are measured during wartime and when one side gains an overwhelming balance of points, then a peace treaty is signed that can result in war reparations, exchange of provinces, ceding of ships or naval treaties that limit naval construction programmes

So I think that such a treaty might be possible even in 1v1 war. But it also mentioned Washington naval treaty as an example even ,,international'' treaties will be possible .

But we will see.

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

Well they were kinda ready in WW1, thou only really worked well in WW2, which would be quite late in game.

 

Well i would say that they worked very well in both world wars.

If we take Kaiserliche marine and Kriegsmarine as examples: ww1: 12,850,815 tons sunk by uboots

                                                                                                              ww2:14.1 million tons GRT

While Kaiserliche marine had 351 total operational uboots and Kriegsmarine had 1 162 of them.

So we could even say that they were doing better in 1ww.

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

That does sound plausible thou I wonder what you do when enemy fleet directly attack you own TP or ports or whatever. I can't quite see the BC be too helpful there. And big navies could probably have alot of crusiers to defend their convoys, but we will see.

Sure BB's are much better for fleet engagements. While BC's are much better for trade interdiction. 

About those cruisers: This is actually the reason why is BC best option for raider. When i try these simulations I usually give the convoy strong protection that contains CA's CL's and DD's and if I use CA or CL as raider it can't beat such a escort. But when I use BC, such a escort is never really a threat unless it gets too close. (Because of torpedo attack)

[Jatzi]

The question of what to build and deploy on a limited budget really depends on how the AI reacts to wars in far off places. Historically battles on the other side of the war usually were between cruisers as they were the ones cruising around the world carrying a presence in far off stations. Hopefully the AI deploys cruisers to places like Indonesia rather than heavy capital ships. This is uncommon in RTW, the AI will often deploy at least a few BB's where a war is going on. But if the AI here is better than yeah armored cruisers all the way for Spain.

No one has brought up fighting and expanding in the Mediterranean though. Austria would probably be an easy target that isnt too far away. You could focus your strength there. Maybe even attack Italy who will also be fairly weak and slow to grow. 

[SiWi]

Well the mediterranean would be a possible area of expansion, given that you don't really need to expose the homeland to build up forces for that.

It is however the problem that you maybe get very vulnerable if attack by other powers.

Austria and Italy also have the advantage over you, that they only have the Mediterranean to worry about, so I wouldn't underestimate them.

[Aceituna]

1 hour ago, Jatzi said:

Austria would probably be an easy target that isnt too far away. You could focus your strength there. Maybe even attack Italy who will also be fairly weak and slow to grow. 

I really don't like when people underestimate Austro-Hungarian navy. In fact it really wasn't ,,weak'' as a lot of people think. During ww1 it was considered major naval power which Spain wasn't.

[Jatzi]

For sure it's more powerful than Spain but players vs AI I'm betting we should be able to beat Austria given some good designs. 

Also I'd take a fight with Italy or Austria in the Med over America in the Caribbean or Japan or France in Southeast Asia any day. 

Something else to consider is alliances. The ally system is fairly simple in RTW and barely better in RTW 2 but I'm hoping it's a bit more robust here. Secure an alliance with basically anyone should probably be a key priority for Spain to secure an advantage anywhere you can.

Edited June 3, 2020 by Jatzi

[Aceituna]

11 minutes ago, Jatzi said:

For sure it's more powerful than Spain but players vs AI I'm betting we should be able to beat Austria given some good designs. 

I don't think that only good designs wood be enough but if you would boost yourself by beating some minor nations before than probably yes.

 

13 minutes ago, Jatzi said:

Also I'd take a fight with Italy or Austria in the Med over America in the Caribbean or Japan or France in Southeast Asia any day. 

 

Actually in the time campaing starts Austrian navy was  stronger than the japanese.  (not to mention that japan is more vulnerable to convoy raids) japanese navy became stronger over austrian around the beginning of dreadnought era.

So during earlier stages of the campaing i would for sure prefer war with japan over war with austria.

Also austria can quite easily hit your home waters (spain mediterranean coast) while the only spain possession japanese can hit are Philippines.

[SiWi]

well there is certainly an Argument to have, that they are probably the weakest (long term) potential enemy that spain has.

Thou I would still be cautious about going onto the offensive, given the context that they (italy A-H) don#t need to splitt forces.

And I assume that spain will always be able to past Gibraltar, otherwise the whole thing gets more complicated if spain fleet could be cut in half.

Edited June 3, 2020 by SiWi

[Aceituna]

8 minutes ago, SiWi said:

And I assume that spain will always be able to past Gibraltar, otherwise the whole thing gets more complicated if spain fleet could be cut in half.

I assume that blockage of gibraltar strait could only happen if spain is at war with Britain. And here comes the question: how will be army presented in-game? Because if the army works well in-game it should be able to conquer it.

 

12 minutes ago, SiWi said:

well there is certainly an Argument to have, that they are probably the weakest (long term) potential enemy that spain has.

 

Yes if we include only major nations but there will be even minor nations present. So if we want to play offensively i think it would be much better (and safer) to first try to defeat some minor nations. For example greece or turkey or if we manage to hold our colonies than some south american countries.

[Jatzi]

Armies are going to be abstracted afaik similar to how they are in RTW

[TAKTCOM]

On 5/31/2020 at 5:12 PM, SiWi said:

...i would argue that is terrible...

Because it means that you can end up fighting EVERYONE, even Japan, Austria and Italy.

...Hell historical speaking, they fought the US in 1898, merely 8 years after the game starts.  And I think it is save to say, that they have not the budget to fight off at all fronts...

...they may be a way to fight off the US in Cuba or defend your other possessions relative cheaply...

Those are anyhow my thoughts about Spain, what are yours?

If I understand game mechanics correctly, the only way to start a war with someone is in the player hands. AI is completely passive, and why you need start a war with the United States, if you can become their allies? Nonetheless, as an admiral, you definitely need to ruin diplomatic relations with someone and start a war, for the sake of fame and money. Or you get fired. 

So, how Italy start a war with Ethiopia, and Russia may start a conflict with Turkey, so the Spain can find  something even poorer and smaller than herself and then rob this loser. This is how colonialism works. 

I think the main problem of Spain will be in it itself - no money, bad shipyards, where ships are built for a long time and with flaws. This is by the way a question about national traits. How many Spain will have penalties and how many bonuses. I thought about traits for different countries, but my knowledge was mainly enough for the concepts of England, Japan and Russia. I don’t know much about Spain, so besides “little money” and “weak industry”, I don’t have any special assumptions.

On 5/31/2020 at 6:14 PM, SiWi said:

Personal I was first thinking Germany (I'm German so I'm a bit bias) but now tend to think USA or UK, since I first want to learn "the ropes" of the campaign. 

Hah, same but replace Germany with Russia

Edited June 3, 2020 by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT

[SiWi]

21 minutes ago, TAKTCOM said:

If I understand game mechanics correctly, the only way to start a war with someone is in the player hands. AI is completely passive, and why you need start a war with the United States, if you can become their allies? Nonetheless, as an admiral, you definitely need to ruin diplomatic relations with someone and start a war, for the sake of fame and money. Or you get fired. 

That will maybe be in the first version of the campaign, I just can't Imaging that it would be its end goal thou. I mean if I only have to fight, when I chose how can I really lose?

Thou I don't play RTW or RTW 2 and maybe there it is the case noone does something unless the player starts it?

24 minutes ago, TAKTCOM said:

I think the main problem of Spain will be in it itself - no money, bad shipyards, where ships are built for a long time and with flaws. This is by the way a question about national traits. How many Spain will have penalties and how many bonuses. I thought about traits for different countries, but my knowledge was mainly enough for the concepts of England, Japan and Russia. I don’t know much about Spain, so besides “little money” and “weak industry”, I don’t have any special assumptions.

Well my Spain naval knowledge is either centuries before aka "the armada" (not a really helpful name if you speak Spanish I would think) or base on what Drachinfiel told about the Spanish navy in the Spanish American war.

Thou maybe the dev give traits base on "legend".

Otherwise, they had the smallest Dreadknought class and 3 of them and nothing else in terms of BB's. So maybe a bonus for cruiser? I mean TP is something I rather would give to Italy, base on WW2.

Political speaking, well you have a civil war coming... So huge naval budgets don't look likely indeed.

[SiWi]

1 hour ago, Aceituna said:

I assume that blockage of gibraltar strait could only happen if spain is at war with Britain. And here comes the question: how will be army presented in-game? Because if the army works well in-game it should be able to conquer it.

Yeah it should but what if UK joins a war or declares one while you are in the business of fighting another?

And the army will probably take a while. It is really hard to tell thou how these things work indetail and so many things depend on them.

 

Quote

Yes if we include only major nations but there will be even minor nations present. So if we want to play offensively i think it would be much better (and safer) to first try to defeat some minor nations. For example greece or turkey or if we manage to hold our colonies than some south american countries.

True, but I don't assume the Ai to be completely passive (maybe wrongly?) and Italy and A-H would themselves act, and so would france.

We also don't know how much you actually could get out of lets say controlling Greece and if that is enough to turn the tides. 

[Marshall99]

I think if you choose to play with Spain, you have to build low budget battleships, smaller dreadnoughts. Like these ships:

You have to build compact, "jolly joker" battleships, that can be effective against most of the targets (dd, ca ,bc, bb).

[TAKTCOM]

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

That will maybe be in the first version of the campaign, I just can't Imaging that it would be its end goal thou. I mean if I only have to fight, when I chose how can I really lose?

Easy. You decided to seize the territory inhabited by savages. What could go wrong?

Well, they may not be so savage and buy (on credit) a few destroyers from your enemies. Then a sudden meeting with your Armada and BOOM.

Your neighbors may not like it and you will have a choice, give up your colonial possessions, or start a war with the European powers.

The quality of your ship was so poor that it drowned on the way to the savages.

The crew would be so untrained that it exploded the ship by accident.

and 100500 possible options. Everything is in the hands of developers.

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

Thou I don't play RTW or RTW 2 and maybe there it is the case noone does something unless the player starts it?

Read the first article from the same writer.

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

Thou maybe the dev give traits base on "legend".

I did not understand what  mean "legend" 

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

Otherwise, they had the smallest Dreadknought class and 3 of them and nothing else in terms of BB's. So maybe a bonus for cruiser? I mean TP is something I rather would give to Italy, base on WW2.

Game start is 1890. Dreads will appear only after 15 years. Cruisers? Not sure. Russia and France developed cruisers to destroy british trade fleet, the British - to protect trade. Spaniards ... because they did not have money for battleships? Then you have to give the same bonus to China and Japan. I agree that there should be both bonuses and penalties. Damn, my concept  Russian Empire probably has more minuses than bonuses. But cruisers? However, I know a little about the Spanish fleet.

2 hours ago, SiWi said:

Political speaking, well you have a civil war coming... So huge naval budgets don't look likely indeed.

Сivil war in RTW means you need a small, victorious war

1 hour ago, Marshall99 said:

I think if you choose to play with Spain, you have to build low budget battleships, smaller dreadnoughts. Like these ships:

You have to build compact, "jolly joker" battleships, that can be effective against most of the targets (dd, ca ,bc, bb).

Good pictures, but these ships were built in defeated Spain.To win, you need other ships. Which ones will become clear after the release of the company.

Edited June 3, 2020 by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT

[Jatzi]

So yeah in RTW tensions go up possibly randomly and then events can also change them. You can sometimes take a prestige, and usually budget, loss to decrease tensions or you can increase tensions. However, there are cases where regardless of your efforts the game sorta forces war on you. I had this happen with me as Italy vs GB. I didn't want to go to war with GB(a second time in this case, the 1st time was hard enough) but it happened anyways. My efforts only delayed it rather than stopping it. I'm expecting something like this to happen in UA:D at first. Hopefully eventually the AI will fight itself and you can maybe support one side or the other and have just a more robust system than RTW does. 

But honestly, you guys are saying you won't have the budget to have a lot of ships so use like smaller and weaker ships. But what about just making good ships, like quality over quantity. That doesn't really work in a lot of cases as like everyone else has the ability to make quality and quantity but there's no point in trying to match the numbers of larger nations. So just make the best ships you can. 

The OP talked about which ships to build and I'm thinking maybe going the Jeune Ecolle route. TB's DD's and CL's with as many torpedoes as possible. Upgunned CA's maybe for more punching power, like pocket BC's? And maybe a battleship or two to provide a small backbone. As I said before I hope the AI is good enough to send mostly cruisers out to far flung colonies, as they should, in which case I feel like this would work great. In RTW 2 in the early years I'm very fond of making very powerful and large CA's with 10 or 11 in main guns and 8 in casemated secondaries. It's actually more expensive than my pre-dreads but it is very effective in a cruiser fight and does fairly well in the battle line too. That's not actually possible in the game right now but hopefully, eventually they'll make hulls that  aren't based off of historical designs to make things interesting

[DougToss]

I really appreciate you taking that link I posted to heart! It was a great article, and I'd love to see the Devs write up and sticky a similar one for this title. 

Spain does indeed face interesting strategic problems, and it is amazing that a country with such a small industrial base was able to hold onto a global empire for so long! Frankly, I'm impressed that Spanish yards could even lay down ships that could cruse to Manilla, let alone safeguard it! 

I was reading about the Spanish-American War and the Germans and French almost immediately had cruisers poking around the Philippines after the Spanish defeat before they were chased off by the Americans. Keeping a hold of colonial possessions may be as much about diplomacy and skillfully managing alliances than credibly controlling the sea-lanes. 

e: Someone made a good point above that Spain would have built an entirely different navy had the Spanish-American War not happened and Spain still needed to protect Cuba and the Philippines. I don't know that Spain had any yards capable of laying down a battlecruiser, but some sort of credible large warship that could protect the colonies, similar to the interwar plans of the Netherlands Navy probably would have been in the cards. Crucially, as the 20th century drew on and Spain fell behind economically and industrially, more creative solutions would have been required to hold onto colonies, similar to how Portugal persisted in being a colonial power through shrewd (some say desperate) expenditure of military power.

Edited June 5, 2020 by DougToss

[SiWi]

On 6/3/2020 at 7:36 PM, TAKTCOM said:

Easy. You decided to seize the territory inhabited by savages. What could go wrong?

*laughs in Zulu and Ethiopia*

Of course nothing

 

On 6/3/2020 at 7:36 PM, TAKTCOM said:

Read the first article from the same writer.

it does sound like a interesting system thou I hope we get the option to have a completely random campaign and one that roughly act on historical lines (similar how HOI4 does).

I do hope thou that the player can't not 100% sure when war breaks out or not because a lot of strategic problems are base on the question: "who we are going to fight?"

On 6/3/2020 at 7:36 PM, TAKTCOM said:

I did not understand what  mean "legend" 

I mean that they get something base on their history, even thou it doesn't really make 100% sense in the era the games plays.

Like: Experience Mercant Protector, 10%+ whatever on Mission to protect Transtports.

This would be roughly base on them having to fight off pirates and privateers.

Doesn't make too much sense maybe in terms of what they actually did in the real timeline but I don't really know what else they would get.

On 6/3/2020 at 7:36 PM, TAKTCOM said:

Game start is 1890. Dreads will appear only after 15 years. Cruisers? Not sure. Russia and France developed cruisers to destroy british trade fleet, the British - to protect trade. Spaniards ... because they did not have money for battleships? Then you have to give the same bonus to China and Japan. I agree that there should be both bonuses and penalties. Damn, my concept  Russian Empire probably has more minuses than bonuses. But cruisers? However, I know a little about the Spanish fleet.

Strategic games often give you bonus base on the perception of a nation/people.

In Civ you get bonus on the navy as England even before boats are a thing. Hence I think that they could get something which maybe doesn't make 100% sense, but is helpful gameplay wise.

On 6/4/2020 at 2:21 AM, Jatzi said:

But honestly, you guys are saying you won't have the budget to have a lot of ships so use like smaller and weaker ships. But what about just making good ships, like quality over quantity. That doesn't really work in a lot of cases as like everyone else has the ability to make quality and quantity but there's no point in trying to match the numbers of larger nations. So just make the best ships you can. 

The problem I see with this approach is twofold:

1 I assume that because of smaller budgets they will lack behind in technology, which means that you may simply don't have the parts to make better ships then the competition.

2 Building fewer ships mean that chance punished you harder then it could otherwise.

If you build 1 ship with lets say 16 inch armour instead of 2 with 12 inch armour you still can get one shoted by a lucks hit (or torpedo hit).

Combine with the technology gap and I see potential danger.

 

There is also the problem that one "super ship" can be super at one place only.

2 good ships can be good at 2 places at the same time.

[DougToss]

@SiWi the obsession with super ships is a persistent, and in my feeling, annoying and distracting problem in this community. You're doing God's work, and you made a good argument. 

[WhoCares]

Minor correction to the OP, the Spanish possession in Asia were the Philippines, not Indonesia (which were at that time the Dutch East Indies). The Spanish lost the Philippines to the USA as a result of the Spanish-American war.

There was even a naval battle between a Spanish and American fleet in Manila Bay, where both fleets consisted of a number of protected cruisers and smaller vessels like gunboats, with many ships still mixed steam + sail ships - wonder how we substitute these, unprotected cruisers - do we have such?! But that already shows what kind of fleets are protecting distant possessions - it's not fleets of BBs and such, but cruisers and smaller vessels.

Speaking about possessions, the USA didn't really have any such in Asia at that time, but still maintained an Asiatic Squadron operating out of a bay near Hong Kong - also going to be interesting to see how this is going to be handled in the campaign, maintaining some naval presence over a longer time in areas where you don't have colonies.

 

I also wonder whether we need many more hulls and ship concepts - like I recently looked up the (Vichy-)French-Thai war, with the battle of Ko Chang, between a fleet with a French CL and some Avisos, which are  DD sized ships with weaker armament, slower, but longer operating range, exactly designed for colonial service. On the other side there were Thai costal Defence ships, again DD sized, but 8" guns and short operating range...

Edited June 9, 2020 by WhoCares