StarDestroyer.Net BBS

By boat or as normal travellers? The netherlands has a fucking lot of waterways and assuming you have got around 50 switch operators on a single rail line, that is about 200-300 men per railroad alone. One can easily smuggle that many people in considering the amount of trading that is going on in that.

This presupposes normal fighters are actually accepted. Have I mentioned that it's a communist police state we are speaking about?

Ah, so now lets all assume that his brigades are placed in the best manner to resist a german invasion. Awesome. Why did I need to make a detailled OOB again?

Show me what garrison town would be holding a garrison of 250,000 men. For that matter since a single division in this era would be covering a front of some 10km 15 divisions would have to be deployed over a front of some 150 km. Even if you pack them WW1 Western front style they'd still be taking up a front of some 80km or so.

Lascaris wrote:

By boat or as normal travellers? The netherlands has a fucking lot of waterways and assuming you have got around 50 switch operators on a single rail line, that is about 200-300 men per railroad alone. One can easily smuggle that many people in considering the amount of trading that is going on in that.

This presupposes normal fighters are actually accepted. Have I mentioned that it's a communist police state we are speaking about?

Yes, several times. A communist police state that has massive industry and a massive economy, ergo substantial trade with the off world. It is quite possible that they can be infiltrated, especially at a time when these kind of operations were relatively new.

Lascaris wrote:Show me what garrison town would be holding a garrison of 250,000 men.

Show me what country the size of the netherlands had 100 million inhabitants in 1925.

Thanas wrote:

Lascaris wrote:Show me what garrison town would be holding a garrison of 250,000 men.

Show me what country the size of the netherlands had 100 million inhabitants in 1925.

[/quote]

Aha. I rest all my other point then. Benelux has 50 million people in its metropolitan areas which are all of 75,000 square km. Which means 670 people per square km or so. In other words the whole place must be a near contiguous urban area. Who needs to argue over the exact positioning of units when it's house to house fighting from day one?

Ryan Thunder wrote:What a bloody mess...

It has to be said that Brazil and the Soviet Union disappearing means extreme and massive changes in the balance of the game. I'm not in the least certain how Cisplatina would operate for example with Brazil going up to the ether all of a sudden.

Perhaps Fin wants to exchange Byzantium with mother Russia so that I can grab Byzantium?

Upon consideration, I will limit my advance to 30 km of infantry on the first day, and to 35-40 depending on terrain for motorized and cavalry units. Note that this is still less than the roman legions, who advanced - on foot - for over 36 km a day.

This is a rough draft of Madagascar's aerial forces for comment, review and approval before I add it to my OOB. I just want to make sure this setup complies with all the rules, and I'd also want comments on how suited the numbers are for the tasks I intend to assign these forces.

I'll decide on specific basing later, though suffice it to say that most of the army forces are concentrated in mainland Madagascar, while many of the naval aircraft are more scattered, either deployed from my lone carrier and handful of seaplane tenders, or based in the outlying islands. As should be obvious, the army force is geared to supporting the army in defense of the homeland, while the Navy force is geared to maritime patrol and and coastal defense. For the record, I have and Air Focus of 5 and tech level of 3 (econ + ind + air = 11). I'm also assuming the number limit applies to combat aircraft and not support planes (transports, shipborne spotters, etc.)

240 fighters (Martinsyde Buzzard, Armstrong-Whitworth Siskin III)
48 CAS Fighter (Sopwith Salamander)
24 reconnaissance/light bomber/general purpose (Fairey III; land version)
18 heavy bombers (Vickers Vimy and Handley Page v/1500 types)

18 carrier fighters (Gloster Nightjar)
48 reconnaissance/light bomber/general purpose (Fairey III; seaplane version)
9 large flying boats (Curtis NC)
15 flying boats (Felixstowe F.5)
120 torpedo bombers (Blackburn Dart)
6 Maritime patrol/reconnaissance zeppelins

Oh yes and Lascaris can have Brazil if he wants. Just thought I'd say that, now I'm off, bye.

Norseman wrote:Oh yes and Lascaris can have Brazil if he wants. Just thought I'd say that, now I'm off, bye.

Do people mind if Cisplatina returns to the ether it came from and it's again Brazil facing off Chilitina and Spanish Uruguay? In such a scenario Brazil would remain communist with the OOB Cisplatina currently has. Point distribution would be as such:

Population: 3
Home Territory: 4 (I'd ask for a dispensation for the economically useless Amazon rainforest)
Colonial Territory: 0
Industry: 5
Economy: 4
Infrastructure: 4
Standing Military Limit: 3
Naval Focus: 1+3
Army Focus: 3
Air Focus: 3

Thoughts?

I should note that having Stas and Norseman leaving changes the nature of the game for Peru-Bolivia. I am not sure if I will be able to continue playing as well.

Do people mind if Cisplatina returns to the ether it came from and it's again Brazil facing off Chilitina and Spanish Uruguay? In such a scenario Brazil would remain communist with the OOB Cisplatina currently has. Point distribution would be as such:

Population: 3
Home Territory: 4 (I'd ask for a dispensation for the economically useless Amazon rainforest)
Colonial Territory: 0
Industry: 5
Economy: 4
Infrastructure: 4
Standing Military Limit: 3
Naval Focus: 1+3
Army Focus: 3
Air Focus: 3

Thoughts?

I have no problems with that, however, (and I realize I have no real right to even ask this and fully respect your right to decline) would you be willing to give up a few of the old Cisplatine territories so that I might add them to "Spanish Uruguay"?

Lasc has asked to take over Brazil and play it as Veg was. I'm in favor of it, I just want to consider the opinions of my co-mods before confirming it.

Steve wrote:Lasc has asked to take over Brazil and play it as Veg was. I'm in favor of it, I just want to consider the opinions of my co-mods before confirming it.

As already said I'm not entirely certain I'd want to throw Cisplatina away, after all had quite some fun making up history out of straw. Alternatively I suppose that I would want Matto Grosso do Sul and the South-East region of Brazil to be incorporated into Cisplatina, Cisplatina as originally made had the absolute minimum territory to make it a country after all. And anyone taking up Brazil would be an unknown quanmtity at least to me...

Norseman wrote:Oh yes and Lascaris can have Brazil if he wants. Just thought I'd say that, now I'm off, bye.

Thanks greatly, though, for posting a back dated treaty of mutual defense before you left. Every other diplomatic maneuver out there had groundwork laid for quite some time prior and was posted prior to events getting posted that wouldn't have occurred if they were known. In other words Mexico wouldn't have sent the ultimatum with the limited ground work it laid with non-aggression pacts elsewhere and not having pursued additional allies at the cost of time. In other words retroactive treaty bullshit aside I'm sending Steve, Timothy and Rogue attack info.

Apparently they'd finalized it a week ago, though I agree that they should have posted something first. As such I'm inclined to retcon it if my co-mods have no objections - I will allow Ryan to defend it first.

Can I just point out, to everyone who is leaving, that at present the game's still ridiculously young and hasn't settled down yet?

Also, two people leaving - only of which we actually KNOW for sure is - shouldn't be enough to trigger a 'too many people leaving, I'm out of here' response. Step back, think, and then come back and let things settle. This is the first major lot of wars, of course there are going to be some issues.

loomer wrote:Can I just point out, to everyone who is leaving, that at present the game's still ridiculously young and hasn't settled down yet?

Also, two people leaving - only of which we actually KNOW for sure is - shouldn't be enough to trigger a 'too many people leaving, I'm out of here' response. Step back, think, and then come back and let things settle. This is the first major lot of wars, of course there are going to be some issues.

Don't worry about it, Norseman did the same in the last game and then tried to rescind his "screw you all I'm leaving" post.


It's just what he does.

Steve wrote:Apparently they'd finalized it a week ago, though I agree that they should have posted something first. As such I'm inclined to retcon it if my co-mods have no objections - I will allow Ryan to defend it first.

By posting it after the Mexican Ultimatum, I would like a very good reason why it should stay.

Thanas - We need two mods and an observer to do do die rolls, and I'm working second shift for a few days here. Right now I haven't seen Rogue in a few days, and Steve is asleep, so we will get to it when we can.

TimothyC wrote:

Steve wrote:Apparently they'd finalized it a week ago, though I agree that they should have posted something first. As such I'm inclined to retcon it if my co-mods have no objections - I will allow Ryan to defend it first.

By posting it after the Mexican Ultimatum, I would like a very good reason why it should stay.

Like what? You all saw the letter I sent them.

Negotiations began shortly thereafter, and I would've posted myself at least week ago if I'd been able to get a straight answer out of Lascaris. Norseman had agreed for certain before that.

Ryan Thunder wrote:

TimothyC wrote: By posting it after the Mexican Ultimatum, I would like a very good reason why it should stay.

Like what? You all saw the letter I sent them.

Negotiations began shortly thereafter, and I would've posted myself at least week ago if I'd been able to get a straight answer out of Lascaris. Norseman had agreed for certain before that.

Two problems I have:

1) With the IG time freeze any negotiations would have needed to begun in November to reasonably conclude before the note or the ultimatum. For the record I've posted several items about diplomatic initiatives that I sent out back before Thanksgiving that I figure were just signed based on the needs of such diplomacy.

2) The note was sent on the 6th with a formal note with time limit attached sent on the 7th...that means you had the space of 5 freakin days to do this and now are trying to retcon it in before the ultimatum. That's just straight up lazy on your part and I should not be hurt because you couldn't even post a one line "diplomats are negotiating" bit between the first time I started to finger point and now.


*Edit* To clarify. I have no issue with the treaty being formed where the details are sketchy and not all of the participants known. That's fine but even for my super secret courier only negotiations I still at least posted both IG and OOC that I had concluded a series of semi-secret treaties, you didn't even give me that to work against.

Well, sorry. The Pact is in force, however.

I've no problem with, say, retconning the ultimatum if you wish to do so. We can just carry on as if it never happened.

Roman legions advanced on foot but they did not require tons of supplies. Speeds of advance of a rifle division were not taken by me from the ceiling. On march, without meeting any resistance, 30 km is the top a 1920 infantry division could make. That's basically on-march speed.

Railways and roads increase that, but advancing over plain terrain against enemy lines cannot do any faster than 20-30 km even against an army in disarray. Hell, 30 km/day is what the Wehrmacht infantry divisions made when advancing into USSR, and they were significantly more motorized. Motorized divisions can make more, but in 1920s, those are experiemntal units.

Ryan Thunder wrote:Well, sorry. The Pact is in force, however.

I've no problem with, say, retconning the ultimatum if you wish to do so. We can just carry on as if it never happened.

If Wilkens wants to do that he can, but if anything's getting retconned short of Wilkens asking for that it's your Pact.

CmdrWilkens wrote:

Ryan Thunder wrote:

TimothyC wrote: By posting it after the Mexican Ultimatum, I would like a very good reason why it should stay.

Like what? You all saw the letter I sent them.

Negotiations began shortly thereafter, and I would've posted myself at least week ago if I'd been able to get a straight answer out of Lascaris. Norseman had agreed for certain before that.

Two problems I have:

1) With the IG time freeze any negotiations would have needed to begun in November to reasonably conclude before the note or the ultimatum. For the record I've posted several items about diplomatic initiatives that I sent out back before Thanksgiving that I figure were just signed based on the needs of such diplomacy.

2) The note was sent on the 6th with a formal note with time limit attached sent on the 7th...that means you had the space of 5 freakin days to do this and now are trying to retcon it in before the ultimatum. That's just straight up lazy on your part and I should not be hurt because you couldn't even post a one line "diplomats are negotiating" bit between the first time I started to finger point and now.

For the record Cisplatina has not officialy answered to Gran Colombia's call for a defence treaty. Please note though that by the same token Cisplatina will act as it sees fit in support of its geopolitical interests. If we decide that said interests call for intervention somewhere we will so intervene with or without treaties.

A word of warning:

I had four hours of sleep yesterday. Tonight I've had just over half that due to a sleep-shattering leg cramp followed by severe inability to sleep. The result will be one very cranky, half-cognizant mod.

Ryan Thunder wrote:

TimothyC wrote:

Steve wrote:Apparently they'd finalized it a week ago, though I agree that they should have posted something first. As such I'm inclined to retcon it if my co-mods have no objections - I will allow Ryan to defend it first.

By posting it after the Mexican Ultimatum, I would like a very good reason why it should stay.

Like what? You all saw the letter I sent them.

Negotiations began shortly thereafter, and I would've posted myself at least week ago if I'd been able to get a straight answer out of Lascaris. Norseman had agreed for certain before that.

What can I say? We are not in the habit of jumping into treaties without the slightest though.