Matrix Games Forums

Hi, if my hardrive gets repaired and/or information gets transferred out I want to create some extra scenarios beyond the ones I have already included.

So far, there are the OBC41, OBC42, OBSOL, OBMARI, OBC_A (tora, tora, tora), OBC_B (PBEM OBC41), OBC_E (an upgraded OBPHIL)

I was planning to do a hypothetical 'what if the washington treaty never happened' scenario. I have found many proposals of ships by many nations that were scrapped by the treaty, yet would like some other ideas. I propose that shipbuilding would be limited due to economic problems (British were planning to cut back shipbuilding even before the treaty) and the stock market crash (so there won't be 100's of battleships floating around!).

I need ideas on what would happen regarding the following...

Carriers (would there be as many, would they be as large (due to battlecruiser hulls not being used), etc...)

IJN (with no washington treaty restrictions, how large would their navy get (ie 8-8 plan)? would they need to create super ships (CA and DD) and super torpedo's to make up for numerical inferiority?)

Allied Navies (if there were no treaty restrictions, how large would cruisers get [beyond 10 000t], would the Dutch experience a need for massive shipbuilding earlier, would cost effectiveness still have allied nations using obsolete ships [Revenge Class, Hermes Class, Nevada Class, Pennsylvania Class, etc...], would the RAN and RNZN experience massive reinforcements fron the RN, in the form of battleships/battlecruisers)

Land Combat Units (would they increase in size/number, or remain the same? Would the Philippines have a larger army, or US contingent?)

Aircraft (with more battleships beign built inter-war, with more learned, thereby more focus on them, would aircraft develop as fast? Would Carrier Admirals ever win over battleship Admirals? Would aircraft actually be more advanced to make up for the progress in battleships?)

Any other suggestions, regarding any other feature would be welcome.

I was even thinking about making a scenario where Britain signed a deal with the Germans after the fall of France, retaining its empire (thereby a greater British influence) but with Japan recieving supply from Germany through Russia (in the form of a large oil factory at Port Arthur).

Originally posted by Major Tom:
Hi, if my hardrive gets repaired and/or information gets transferred out I want to create some extra scenarios beyond the ones I have already included.

So far, there are the OBC41, OBC42, OBSOL, OBMARI, OBC_A (tora, tora, tora), OBC_B (PBEM OBC41), OBC_E (an upgraded OBPHIL)

Thanks again for adding both the tora, tora, tora option and the PBEM variant (I assume this starts the Aussies with historic locations and strengths.)

If you've already made all the bug fixes that you plan to make, I'd request, hard drive permitting, that you issue the patch with the scenarios you've already got. Additional scenarios can always be released later.

As your questions suggest, once you get into open-ended scenarios like "no Washington Treaty" you can have months of debate about whether it would mean more BBs more CVs, etc. etc. I'd rather get the patch ASAP to make what we've got (which is great!) more playable.

My 2 cents on your variant: Bigger BBs and CAs/BCs (but not more total ships -- remember peacetime budget constraints). Some older ships which appear in the current game might have been mothballed and could be reactivated a few months into the war.

BB Admirals would be more dominant in doctrine -- the CVs would be built to scout and harrass enemy fleets. Aircraft would be optimized for scouting, defensive air cover, and to attack enemy escort ships (CAs and DDs). Given budget constraints and the greater share of resources going to capital ships, there would be less emphasis on the quality of naval aircraft, not more.

On the other hand, the US at least would probably have invested more in the "Big Bomber" (B-17)concept for coastal defense against enemy fleets. Might even have have some marine/naval LBA squadrons of B-17s.

Originally posted by Major Tom:
I was planning to do a hypothetical 'what if the washington treaty never happened' scenario.

Well, first off, *all* of the post first world war building plans of *every* nation were hopelessly optimisitic. Virtually all the building plans were kept alive as long as they did just as negotiating chips at Washington.

The British had already made the decision not to build the G3s and N3s (though you'd probably eventually see at least two of the G3's and possibly all four if Washington had not happened). The big change in the RN would be the survival of a number of existing ships (at least the Tiger battlecruiser; and the four Iron Duke battleships, possibly more)

The Japanese 8-8 plan was totally beyond their capacity (expect to eventually see the Kaga's and maybe one or two of the Amagi's).

The US was in the best position. But the navy already had serious doubts about the Lexington battlecruisers (already considering scrapping or converting them). At best one or two may have been completed. The fourth Colorado would have been completed, but the General Board had already decided against building the South Dakota's on grounds of expense.

Carriers. The US was already seriously considering converting some of the Lexington's before Washington and the British decision on the Furious, Couragous and Glorious was pretty much common sense (these ships were useless as built and the conversion of the Furious was unrelated to Washington and nearly completed). The Japanese are *less* likely, but its highly unlikely that all the Amagi's could have been completed as battlecruisers and so its not beyond the realms of possibility that two could have ended up as carriers.

Cruisers. The 10,000T cruiser was a product of the Treaty more than any other ship. Look for light cruisers in the 8-10K ton range with 7.5" guns and no heavies (except in the RN the heavy cruiser was used to make up for the shortage of battleships, their fleet scouting role would have been given to the 3rd gen battlecruisers that Washington killed). Expect both the Japanese and US to build tinclads while the RN was in a "never have a ship blow up again" period and was armouring everything.

The RAN and RNZN? expect no great changes. The RAN may have replaced her battlecruiser with a new one eventually but the Australia was a prestigue ship. Both fleets would be based around light cruisers.

The Dutch, probably no change. They were seriously hurt by the 1st WW and were hit just as hard by the depression. But that's no fun. Maybe give them a battlecruiser instead of their light cruisers.

Blackhorse,
I noticed your handle. I am a fellow Blackhorse alum. I was in the the 1/11 ACR Charlie troop, from 1983 to 1987 in Fulda. Yes I agree, it was the best damn regiment you ever did see!!!!!!

Cav Scouts, first out, last in.