Come on fellas, I contribute more than enough to this forum to get some helpful advice in an AU topic without being ignored.
| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| Reworking North Point http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2673 |
Page 1 of 9 |
| Author: | Colosseum [ February 19th, 2012, 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Reworking North Point |
http://statesmanship.co.uk/wiki/North_P ... _formation Think this might be a bit too powerful for a nation of only 27 million. Willing to start from the ground up here... any ideas? |
|
| Author: | Colosseum [ February 19th, 2012, 9:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
Come on fellas, I contribute more than enough to this forum to get some helpful advice in an AU topic without being ignored.
|
|
| Author: | TimothyC [ February 19th, 2012, 9:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
Ok, you're probably looking at a budget on the order of Canada, Australia, Italy, maybe closer to Spain. It depends on what you want to do with the budget. Pop back in the chat and I can talk more, but it really is a give and take without setting up huge logic trees. Edit: Or we can do it here, but it's a lot of posts. Edit2: What do you want the Submarine forces to be like? Are you doing long range patrol or are you doing stuff close to home? Are you doing power projection? If you are, how do you want to project power? Do you want Amphibs or Baby carriers, or surface forces? How close are you to the nation in universe that developed AEGIS? |
|
| Author: | heuhen [ February 19th, 2012, 9:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
or you can do like me, make a silly big country (Haram) that is to rich to be good... |
|
| Author: | CanisD [ February 19th, 2012, 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
Hard to make a real judgment since I'm not familiar with the universe, but from a cursory look its certainly not over the top. It seems heavy on light coastal units which would make sense considering the geography. The lone cruiser makes a good prestige unit. 13 destroyers could be a bit much for such a small country, but that could be countered by the fact that its an island nation and the navy would hold a much higher priority in the budget. From reading the nation description North Point is a neutral without any real enemies so all the amphibious forces might be a bit excessive. |
|
| Author: | Colosseum [ February 19th, 2012, 10:40 pm ] | |||
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point | |||
Thanks guys.
Ok, you're probably looking at a budget on the order of Canada, Australia, Italy, maybe closer to Spain.
I remember basing some of my budgeting off Australia, with a bit extra because Australia has a slightly smaller population.
What do you want the Submarine forces to be like? Are you doing long range patrol or are you doing stuff close to home?
I was told that North Point would require lots of high-quality littoral SSKs, which is what the Vanguard/Repulse classes are.
Are you doing power projection? If you are, how do you want to project power? Do you want Amphibs or Baby carriers, or surface forces? How close are you to the nation in universe that developed AEGIS?
No power projection. For whatever reason I remember making a large amphib requirement because there are so many islands... the military would want the capability to retake any islands captured by an enemy, but then you said that said military would be more interested in preventing an island capture from even happening to begin with, which makes more sense. I'm probably going to halve the amount of amphibs and severely downsize the LSDs and LPDs.Thinking primarily an amphibious force based around a few larger ships (the Whidbey Islands or Austins).I imagine North Point operated its Saipan class CVLs into the 90s as helicopter carriers (in support of amphib task groups) until they were stricken. Not sure who develops AEGIS as it's never been mentioned in the SMSWorld, but I'm willing to operate ships without it. |
||||
| Author: | TimothyC [ February 19th, 2012, 11:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
Well, let's look at the forces you've got: 1 * Virginia (CGN) 2 * Spruance (DD) 11 * Burke (DDG) 2 * Challenger (FS) 7 * Wildfire (FAC) 17 * Surprise (FAC) 15 * Fremantle (PB) 4 * Armidale (PB) 16 * Vanguard (SSK) 6 * Repulse (SSK) 4 * Austin (LPD) 4 * Whidbey Island (LSD) 2 * Island (LST) 2 * Berlin (AOR) 9 * Avenger (MCM) 5 * Osprey (MCH) 1 * Sacramento (AOE) The Mix isn't bad - I might move AOE-5 to the Western Command just to give that command some indigenous unrep capability. I'd also look at swapping out some of the amphibious forces for Tenders - mostly submarine, but also surface ships. One other question I have is, what forces to the coast guard have, or are he missions that the USCG does rolled into the Navy? |
|
| Author: | nighthunter [ February 19th, 2012, 11:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
Dude, How do I join? And do I need to re-work my flag? |
|
| Author: | Satirius [ February 20th, 2012, 12:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
I think you can get away with replacing the Burkes with MEKOs or somesuch. |
|
| Author: | Colosseum [ February 20th, 2012, 12:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Reworking North Point |
nighthunter: Join what? If you mean SMS, the site is in my signature. As discussed with Timothy and Belka via Shipbucket IRC I am probably going to axe the following: - All Arleigh Burkes - CGN - All Whidbey Islands - Rework and simplify all missile ships and small combatants - Reduce number of in-service blimps - Reduce number of Austins to 2 and investigate using them as command ships - Replace Arleigh Burkes with 1-2 of the Flight III 1988 proposal AB - Camouflage all ships in appropriate measures based on their operating areas, for maximised elan despite being in the missile/computer age |
|
| Page 1 of 9 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
