Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ukrainian Ranger]

At the moment our shipping is being hounded by submarines, so we need something that can deal with submarines. 

We solved that issue designwise, we have designs for that just need to produce them
1 ASW and 1 Airship sunk so many subs, what will happen when we'll have dozens of them?
I dislike the whole idea to make ship after ship with roughly same purpose... I wouldn't propose destroyer at all, but as variant I dislike got voted I opted to offer something with unique, useful and aggressive role

I don't see the point of 80mm guns, for firing A.A. flack? 

Mostly, and one more gun against smaler ships getting close

And in numbers either ship could deal with surface raiders.

Not gonna happen anytime soon, we have no facilities to build more than one per year, even that is hard... If we captured naval facilities of our neighbor....

I think that, being on a peninsula, we are likely to become a naval power

I'd very like too, but I think to become naval power we need to increase our naval industry and conquest nearby country known for naval industry....

But if we go diplomacy, then
8. Not ask our neighbor to join the war against Morovia (assistance like brood wants is exactly that)

Instead go for economical\military cooperation
Try to buy some navy ships from our neighbor, maybe offering some of our older biplane fighters in exchange (not more than two hundreds). Also may sell them some of our original gas badgers. Alternatively loan one of their naval yards and workers to build a new ship for us... or contract their shipbuilders to build 4000 sized naval shipyard in our country. Capitalists tend to love money too much

Also, attacks on Morovia with our biplanes is a waste of pilots, so should not be done, not enough range, not enough speed, not enough payload

vote for 3, the deep-water crossing of legend!.

Please, noooooo. One storm and we have no coastal defense boats

we should work on a tank mounted flame thrower, tell the special forces not to horde all the SVA-10s.
Sell off the Mosin Nagants and buy a few shotguns/ pistols.

Why do you think all WW2 armies used bolt actions rifles? Those aren't bad weapons and selling them off is nonsense

[kahn1234]

UR: The US used the M1 Garand and the M1A1 Carbine, both were semi-auto. the only bolt action rifle was the Springfield rifle, used by snipers.

and the British used the Enfield because it was highly accurate, had a high ammo capacity, could be fired fast and was exceptionally reliable.

The German Mauser 98 Karabiner wasnt a particularly good rifle, nor were the Japanese or Italian equivalents. Outdated and old, unlike the constantly upgraded Enfield and the new Garand and M1A1.

The Moisin Nagant was a good rifle, though not great. the SVT-10 was a fantastic rifle, it was even modified to have a 3 shot burst fire and fire-select to switch beteen said burst fire and semi auto. Sadly the Russians scrapped them as too expensive.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Ok, most armies of WW2 used bolt actions rifles just fine

I kinda dislike that new trend edit older post to edit votes,. That seems wrong because it makes monitoring the situation very hard and if post with votes includes proposals, no one can that you never edited your proposals after they were voted

[Brood]

Seems easier theen doing your votes over and over though and if you pay attention you'll notice changes to proposals anyway.

As for 3.2 causing friendly fire, thats why you have this wonderous thing called a Radio..... so you can inform friendly units where you are before the attack begins so you know which ones are friendly and which ones are not.

You wan't to prevent capitalists from helping us out ( which btw I never suggested at all ) then get them to give us ships, give them planes and get them to build docks for us?
I have no intention of them helping us I just don't want a war without trying diplomacy first.

The planes have enough range to make the trip and with almost 1000 thats plenty to do damage and since they are out dated almost may as well put them to use before they become relics.

[mesor]

.... So you want to open the door for another nation to send spies into our land and sabotage us instead? Very smart.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Seems easier theen doing your votes over and over though and if you pay attention you'll notice changes.

That ruins lists made by some players, that's not that easy to recount, that allows editing proposals after they are voted

.... So you want to open the door for another nation to send spies into our land and sabotage us instead? Very smart.

Sure, Western nations sabotaged USSR when helped to build industry in
1930s...


Also I find it amusing that you vote for a very close military cooperation with neighbor without fear of betrayal but economic cooperation is awful idea for you( What will happen if we'll get attacked by a country that gave us military access? Our troops in Morovia will lose the only supply line and get attacked from behind...)
 I do prefer attack... But if we go dilomacy, trying to form military alliance with our neighbor is senseless, they have no reason to start a war against Morovia to help us, while they do have reasons to make some money by selling some services. and they may be interested in our older equipment

Can you, Mesor,  please, stop playing the like\dislike game supporting just every suggestion from  brood and opposing just all my proposals just because it came from me? (except very generic stuff)

...... No. Raiding supply lines has been part of war since practically the beginning of organised war. It's a valid and logical tactic.

Well, military equipment count toward supply lines, that's more about attacking stuff that needed by civilians and industry.... Idea is to make Morovia look like bad boy and us like good guys

[10ebbor10]

Distinguising military and civilian supplies is hard however. Often, it will be carried by the same vehicles, and well, if the army runs out of stuff, they will just sieze part of the civilian goods.

[Brood]

Can you point out where I said military alliance? No? Thats because I didn't. I said alliance, which means trade is opened which works perfectly well for that kind of goverment.
When we invade by land we can hold a second force in reserve so if they betray us then we attack them from 2 sides at once and squash them.

Starting a war based on what might happen is just pointless, as for supplies? We have an army in a counry we just took control of. We use supplies from them instead.

As for it being civilian supplies, if you hit civilian supplies they go without, they go without they complain, they complain the goverment is pressured.
Pressure results in them making pore choices trying to fix the issue quickly and helps us to win.

[mesor]

It's cute that you think your that important but I voted for the ideas of I think 4 different people this turn alone? I didn't vote for yours because I don't like your ideas, that sub is a monstrosity at best and the stealth sub even more so. You want to go from never building a sub at all to a more advanced one then the nations that been working on them in a single turn, which I in no way agree with.

If I did then I'd vote for it but since I don't, no vote.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Can you point out where I said military alliance? 

  Contact unnamed neighbour to discuss an alliance

An alliance is a pact, coalition or friendship between two or more parties, made in order to advance common goals and to secure common interests.  [/b]

So, what common goals and interests except defeating Morovia (doubt that it is in interest of our neighbor, BTW)

military access to cross lands.

That's a clear act of war from our neighbour. That's how any sane government of Morovia will interpret allowance to attack from Capia's territory
So, our army march through Capia's territory (will use Capia for it as there are no other offers and unnamed country is silly) reach Morovian border and....? We need to attack from Capia's territory, don't you see a little problem here? It's absolutely the same if Capia attacked Morovia directly.

Just imagine, WW2, Allies ferry troops in... Sweden or Spain or Turkey and prepare for the attack... How do you think, would Germany just watch at this and not declare war on "neutral" countries?

[Brood]

They don't have to declare war themselves, it was quite common in early eras for nations to allow military access at a price without declaring war themselves.

It's wortth giving it a shot to see if they allow it.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Quite common in early eras? Sure. But I want WW1 or WW2 examples, warfare and diplomacy are very different from early eras when wars were decided in few decisive battles...

(Yep, Portugal allowed to build a  base at Azores, but that's quite different situation and in fact everyone knew that would Portugal refuse, allies would take it by force, one of the many violation of neutrality in WW2. And THAT is not a direct attack from Portuguese territory to German territory )

It's wortth giving it a shot to see if they allow it.

They'll either reject or accept and betray us badly or, best case scenario, demand part of Morovian territory in the joined war... I see zero political reasons for them to agree to turn their roads\bridges\ports, border cities into a target for Morovian Airforce and artillery with no clear compensation but aiding neighbor with hostile political system

[Taricus]

I could see a number of resaons. The molovians being a bunch of warmongers for one, since they declared war upon us. Not only that, the governmental legitimacy we'd get from dealing with another nation diplomatically would improve our international standing.

Besides, we have no valid reason to wage war upon the [Unnamed nation], and all your sorry excuse of paranoia. We should not invade unless we have a legitimate reason in-context to do so.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Legitimate reason... Just make one. Huge number of wars were started without one
We are freeing workers, that's good enough reason... Some propaganda that they planned to attack us first will be enough

what more do we know about Unnamed Country #2?

They are capitalist swine They don't really care if the the old monarchy gets restored or not. But they are not fond of our planned economy either. They have a larger navy than us by tonnage, but smaller by number when you count  our pt boats. They have fewer soldiers, they have no recent combat experience, but are well trained.

Morovia are monarchist dogs   They wish to restore the old monarchy. They have a small but rapidly growing navy.  They had an early air advantage, they are probably back to being evenly matched. A large portion of their infantry have recent combat experience with us, and were at least our equal.

Really the only post we fot info about our neighbor. See no reason for them to start war
with Morovia as Brood want to ask(demand?), but do see a reason for them to attack us

As for paranoia, I call it prediction. And it can save our ass. If Morovia will get the ally before we'll cripple Capia with surprise attack we will be in the world of trouble, especially at sea.
And conquest has nice effects on war economy, we may double our navy production. Important for our nation

Sooner or later we'll have to fight against our neighbor as we have no other land neighbors, better sooner than later as we spent like 80% of our resources into the army in early years... Our very respectable force will just become obsolete if we'll not start a war now

And still, if you guys want diplomacy why do you shoot down the trade idea and go for extremely unlikely military alliance?

[Brood]

Again, care to quote where I sail military alliance? No? Thats because I didn't. I said alliance.

If we attack for nothing we become the bad guys and that always ends badly.