Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

We, the People -- A USA Interactive FTM AAR

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Name: Senator Clark Gable of Florida
Born: 1905 (age 31)
Party: Republican(Or Liberal Republican faction to be specific)


Foreign policy plans- Europe’s problems are not our problems. However, we must keep an eye on the Empire of the Rising Sun while maintaining both good relations and trade with them.

Budgets for IC- Industrial expansion of the South along with upgrades to existing naval facilities especially in New Orleans and Miami. Also for the expansion of our naval and air forces, priority towards the USAF.

Budgets for leadership- In order to maintain the integrity and sovereignty of this great nation I am for distributing our leadership towards improving our industry and all branches of our armed forces while making sure no foreign agents meddle in our affairs.

Declaring war/signing peace treaties- If we are to commit to war we shall do so with the intent of winning it. We will accept nothing less than unconditional surrender.

Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: None, we will not fight the wars of others.

If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced- Let them prove themselves and let the public decide! Otherwise merits and intellect over patronage.

General deployments overseas- During peace time all forces should be within the continental United States with a small token force protecting Hawaii consisting of a garrison and a small fleet.

All decisions and law changes- Strongly advocate a free and open society for the price of democracy is an eternity of vigilance. Also favor less taxes and a professional, robust armed forces.

Nukes- Yes. Isolationism will not be synonymous with weakness.
 
Last edited:
I'd become a minister, but I still want a voice... D:
 
Terraferma said:
Name: Senator Clark Gable of Florida
Born: 1905 (age 31)
Party: Republican(Or Liberal Republican faction to be specific)


Foreign policy plans- Europe’s problems are not our problems. However, we must keep an eye on the Empire of the Rising Sun while maintaining both good relations and trade with them.

Budgets for IC- Industrial expansion of the South along with upgrades to existing naval facilities especially in New Orleans and Miami. Also for the expansion of our naval and air forces, priority towards the USAF.

Budgets for leadership- In order to maintain the integrity and sovereignty of this great nation I am for distributing our leadership towards improving our industry and all branches of our armed forces while making sure no foreign agents meddle in our affairs.

Declaring war/signing peace treaties- If we are to commit to war we shall do so with the intent of winning it. We will accept nothing less than unconditional surrender.

Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: None, we will not fight the wars of others.

If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced- Let them prove themselves and let the public decide! Otherwise merits and intellect over patronage.

General deployments overseas- During peace time all forces should be within the continental United States with a small token force protecting Hawaii consisting of a garrison and a small fleet.

All decisions and law changes- Strongly advocate a free and open society for the price of democracy is an eternity of vigilance. Also favor less taxes and a professional, robust armed forces.

Nukes- Yes. Isolationism will not be synonymous with weakness.
Click to expand...

Clark Gable, eh? Trying to preempt Ronald Reagan? :D

Sakura_F said:
I'd become a minister, but I still want a voice... D:
Click to expand...

That is a quandary, isn't it?
 
Avindian said:
Clark Gable, eh? Trying to preempt Ronald Reagan? :D
Click to expand...
Funny story, I was going to go with the last name Stark but it would be too...close to a certain character of sorts so I went with a random word in my head. It said Gable. Something tells me my subconscious is laughing at the concidence....or subtle influence of my name choice. Regardless! Yes...yes I am.
 
Terraferma said:
Funny story, I was going to go with the last name Stark but it would be too...close to a certain character of sorts so I went with a random word in my head. It said Gable. Something tells me my subconscious is laughing at the concidence....or subtle influence of my name choice. Regardless! Yes...yes I am.
Click to expand...

Of course, I can't think of Clark Gable without picturing this:

[video=youtube_share;lfGpVcdqeS0]http://youtu.be/lfGpVcdqeS0[/video]
 
Still no more Ministers...must I lead this glorious nation into battle alone?
 
Saithis said:
Still no more Ministers...must I lead this glorious nation into battle alone?
Click to expand...

If I can't get more hits with Monty Python, what else could possibly work? :)

I've asked Salthis to serve as "super minister" until we get some more interest; once we're set up there, I'll have my good senators vote on some important issues.
 
In case one can participate in spite of owning only the basic HoI, and being somewhat unacquainted with the period. I've aimed for a somewhat controversial Republican figure:

Name: Senator Elizabeth H. Danner of Pennsylvania
Born: 1891 (age 45)
Party: Republican

Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Interventionism in the case of populist movements threatening to expand beyond the borders of the nations of their origin.

-- Budgets for IC, including total distribution and which of the four gets what for construction purposes: Continue emphasizing industrial provess, along with additional support for the army, especially the aerial branch thereof.

-- Budgets for leadership, including total distribution and which of the four gets which techs: The American naval force is to be de-emphasized, in favour of a continuation of above policies.

-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War reparations to the United States as well as the countries to whom the aggressor has caused infrastructural damage and civilian loss, along with forced disarmament. Territorial concessions are to be avoided.

-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Any seeking to curb the progress of populist movements on international scale.

-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: A decision which ought not be left for the senate to debate.

-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Maintain and strengthen as proves necessary.

-- All decisions and law changes: Focus on maintaining and improving educational and industrial superiority.

-- Nukes!: A waste of valuable resources. The fear of the Germans developing a weapon remotely approaching the most commonly mentioned estimates is irrational, and resources ought to instead be focused on conventional means, in order to better secure the victory of our troops, should we eventually find that we need to engage in war.
 
I don't know much about the time period, have played the HoI's in passing only. However I'm a sucker for interactive AAR so... yeah.

Name: Senator Alistair Canseliet of Louisiana
Born: 1904 (32 years)
Party: Republican

Policy ideas:

Foreign policy plans: Read my lips - i, so, la, tio, nism. For as long as we can. However keep S. America and Japan-China in check.

-- Budgets for IC, including total distribution and which of the four gets what for construction purposes: Consumer products and supplies prioritized, industrial development and air force investment, it truly is the future.

-- Budgets for leadership, including total distribution and which of the four gets which techs: Armaments minister and Air Force - Navy should come later, but the Army should be the least of our priorities.

-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: I, so, la, tio, nism! Declare war when our safety is at risk (could be preemptive), and not for a wish to be the world policeman. Sign peace treaties when annihilation has been achieved. As one Brazilian wiseman once said, "I'd give a sheep to not enter a fight and a flock to not get out of it"

-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Li-ber-ty! Any market economy-friendly governments, democratic, etc.

-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: Those that show a warmongering, reckless drive.

-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Reinforce as means to defend key locations.

-- All decisions and law changes: Liberalize the economy, support strengthening of the industrial sector.

-- Nukes!: NO.

((Kudos for whoever picks up on the references :p))
 
Moonstruck said:
In case one can participate in spite of owning only the basic HoI, and being somewhat unacquainted with the period. I've aimed for a somewhat controversial Republican figure:

Name: Senator Elizabeth H. Danner of Pennsylvania
Born: 1891 (age 45)
Party: Republican

Policy ideas:
-- Foreign policy plans: Interventionism in the case of populist movements threatening to expand beyond the borders of the nations of their origin.

-- Budgets for IC, including total distribution and which of the four gets what for construction purposes: Continue emphasizing industrial provess, along with additional support for the army, especially the aerial branch thereof.

-- Budgets for leadership, including total distribution and which of the four gets which techs: The American naval force is to be de-emphasized, in favour of a continuation of above policies.

-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: War reparations to the United States as well as the countries to whom the aggressor has caused infrastructural damage and civilian loss, along with forced disarmament. Territorial concessions are to be avoided.

-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Any seeking to curb the progress of populist movements on international scale.

-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: A decision which ought not be left for the senate to debate.

-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Maintain and strengthen as proves necessary.

-- All decisions and law changes: Focus on maintaining and improving educational and industrial superiority.

-- Nukes!: A waste of valuable resources. The fear of the Germans developing a weapon remotely approaching the most commonly mentioned estimates is irrational, and resources ought to instead be focused on conventional means, in order to better secure the victory of our troops, should we eventually find that we need to engage in war.
Click to expand...

Lyonessian said:
I don't know much about the time period, have played the HoI's in passing only. However I'm a sucker for interactive AAR so... yeah.

Name: Senator Alistair Canseliet of Louisiana
Born: 1904 (32 years)
Party: Republican

Policy ideas:

Foreign policy plans: Read my lips - i, so, la, tio, nism. For as long as we can. However keep S. America and Japan-China in check.

-- Budgets for IC, including total distribution and which of the four gets what for construction purposes: Consumer products and supplies prioritized, industrial development and air force investment, it truly is the future.

-- Budgets for leadership, including total distribution and which of the four gets which techs: Armaments minister and Air Force - Navy should come later, but the Army should be the least of our priorities.

-- Declaring war/signing peace treaties: I, so, la, tio, nism! Declare war when our safety is at risk (could be preemptive), and not for a wish to be the world policeman. Sign peace treaties when annihilation has been achieved. As one Brazilian wiseman once said, "I'd give a sheep to not enter a fight and a flock to not get out of it"

-- Which faction we align ourselves to, if any: Li-ber-ty! Any market economy-friendly governments, democratic, etc.

-- If one of the Big Four needs to be fired/replaced: Those that show a warmongering, reckless drive.

-- Input on our general deployments overseas: Reinforce as means to defend key locations.

-- All decisions and law changes: Liberalize the economy, support strengthening of the industrial sector.

-- Nukes!: NO.

((Kudos for whoever picks up on the references :p))
Click to expand...

Glad to have you both!
 
FDR's First State of the Union Address​

January 1, 1936, Washington, DC

My fellow Americans,

Many of us are optimistic about the future, as we should be. The ravages of depression, while not entirely behind us, are at least a bad memory for many. Some will claim that my New Deal is partially responsible, but I would call this nothing short of the triumph of American spirit and ingenuity.

While there is much to be thankful for, I fear the world does not share our optimism. Already, Europe is dividing into three armed camps; the Bolshevik-led Comintern of Joseph Stalin, the Nazi-dominated Axis of Adolf Hitler, and the Allied Nations of Great Britain and France. Many Americans would have us retreat into isolationism, to keep us out of another European war. It is up to you, Senators and Representatives of the Republic, to tell me which way we should lean.

It is also time to craft a new budget, and I am already formally requesting additional funding for our armed forces. It is strictly precautionary, you understand, but it is still something we must consider. Our army is out of date, and if this powder keg in Europe is ignited and we cannot keep out of the conflagration, I am worried that we shall not be up to the task. We must also consider how much to fund the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of State, as well as West Point, Annapolis, and the nation's research institution.

I cannot do this alone. I cannot do this without the support of the American people and you, members of Congress, are the voices of the American people. What say you?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's time to vote! Here's how this will work. We have 153 IC to spend and 33 Leadership (technically 34). We also have to decide the general course of our foreign policy.

The budget for IC has two dimensions -- do we upgrade or modernize first and how much does each department (Army, Navy, Air Force, General Industry) get to spend for the fiscal year?

For leadership, we have to do something similar -- how much do we devote to intelligence, diplomacy, science, and officers, and how do we distribute the science budget? (How many techs does the Army, Navy, Air Force, and General Industry get?)

We'll do this voting in two parts. First, everybody gets to vote on how we align our foreign policy. Choose Comintern, Allies, Axis, or isolationism. Bold your vote!

For the second part, I'd like you to create some specific bills or we'll argue numbers all day long. :) In order to be voted on, two Senators must agree upon a bill; when we have three (at maximum; if we get more people, I'll allow more bills) we'll put it to a general vote. Any Senator can propose a bill.

Here's a sample ballot:
  • Foreign Policy: Comintern
  • Build or modernize? Modernize
  • Proposed budget for IC: 25 for Army, 25 for Navy, 50 for Air Force, 50 for Industry (I'm rounding here)
  • Leadership? 12 for science, 10 for intelligence, 11 for officers, 0 for diplomacy
  • Proposed tech budgets: 4 for army, 4 for general, 3 for navy, 1 for air force


You're free to recommend specific techs or build ideas, and if they're part of the bill, our Big Four (or Big One in this case :) Thanks again to Saithis!) has to incorporate them. Otherwise, the Chiefs and Armaments Minister can do as they wish.

The veto and override mechanics in the US constitution are in play (I can veto any bill; 2/3 of you can override my veto), but I have no intention of using it, unless it's something so ridiculous it can't possibly work (like investing all of our IC in AA in South Dakota, or all the leadership going to diplomacy).

If you have any questions, let me know. Feel free to debate your bills in this thread; if you have a question about something specific, you can PM me. Oh, and Saithis, feel free to stump for what you think is fair!
 
Bill proposed by Senator William Fitzgerald Kenzington of New York

For our foreign policy i propose we stay Independent as the political situation in Europe is still uncertain. We should strive to safeguard the interest of USA and the American people in the Americas and the Pacific Ocean. We should strive to have normalized relations with all countries in the world and not make enemies of any, if they wish to be enemies with us then they can, but we should strive for, as already said, normalized relations with all nations.

For our IC budget i propose that we produce what the consumers need, after that we should do all-out on modernizing our armed forces and first then after that we should begin producing and expanding our Industrial Base with what Industrial capacity that is left available for us. So first, the IC necessary for consumer gods should be put at Maximum (59.67 IC) to prevent any dissent that could threaten the nation. When thats done the rest of the IC should go for modernizing (Uppgrades)[25.59 IC] the armed forces. (I dont have th exact numbers on this.) Then we should put 2.11 for reinforcements to have all available forces up to strenght, a ruther 14.99 to supplies so they dont starve to death and keep ur units with fresh new material for their work. Then focus the remaining, if there is any, on increasing our Industrial Base for Future needs The Aircraft carriers and their planes should be given top priority to get them out of production so we can focus the rest of our IC on expanding out IC. IF there is non after this, then as IC becomes available afterhand we should increas our Industrial Base as the IC allows us.

For leadersship we should spend 0 for diplomacy, we dont want to align ourselves just yet and military alliances with other countries and non-acceptable at this point, we are a self-sufficent country and we have a big overproducing sector that provide us with enough materials to go around. If any country wish to trade with us they will come knocking on our door. We should spend 10 leadership on intelligence as we need to keep an eye on the other nations in the world, i propose we ave highest priority of Japan, Soviet union and Germany, second higest priority for England and France. For officers we dont really need any at this point as we do not seek to expand out armed forces yet. The rest goes for science where industrial techs are what i say should go first and foremost. (Those techs in te same category as all the resources tech, computer techs and those for increased Industrial capacity and efiicency.)After that we should research on our capital ships and carriers as they are our first defence line, the rest i purpose we lay in the hands of the minister/Ministers.
 
Last edited:
Derahan said:
Bill proposed by Senator William Fitzgerald Kenzington of New York

For our foreign policy i propose we stay Independent as the political situation in Europe is still uncertain. We should strive to safeguard the interest of USA and the American people in the Americas and the Pacific Ocean. We should strive to have normalized relations with all countries in the world and not make enemies of any, if they wish to be enemies with us then they can, but we should strive for, as already said, normalized relations with all nations.

For our IC budget i propose that we produce what the consumers need, after that we should do all-out on modernizing our armed forces and first then after that we should begin producing and expanding our Industrial Base with what Industrial capacity that is left available for us.

For leadersship we should spend 0 for diplomacy, we dont want to align ourselves just yet and military alliances with other countries and non-acceptable at this point, we are a self-sufficent country and we have a big overproducing sector that provide us with enough materials to go around. If any country wish to trade with us they will come knocking on our door. We should spend 10 leadership on intelligence as we need to keep an eye on the other nations in the world, i propose we ave highest priority of Japan, Soviet union and Germany, second higest priority for England and France. For officers we dont really need any at this point as we do not seek to expand out armed forces yet. The rest goes for science where industrial techs are what i say should go first and foremost. (Those techs in te same category as all the resources tech, computer techs and those for increased Industrial capacity and efiicency.)After that we should research on our capital ships and carriers as they are our first defence line, the rest i purpose we lay in the hands of the minister/Ministers.
Click to expand...

Would you mind bolding your numbers and giving a little more detail on the breakdown of the IC you'd see spent on new units, as in who gets how much? If you don't want to give specific numbers, that's fine, but percentages would doubtless be helpful to those who might wish to support your bill.
 
(( I'm compiling this more for those with no HOI3 experience than anything. ))

A Report into the United States Industry
As compiled by Robert F. Wagner, Armaments Minister

Gentlemen of the Congress, I wish to brief you on the situation that the Industry of the United States currently faces. The Great Depression has hit our economy hard, but we are still the greatest producer of goods on this planet!

The United States currently has 253 Base Industrial Capacity, but due to the effects of the Great Depression and our Civilian focused economy, unemployment and private ownership have reduced the amount that the US Government can effectively dictate production of to just 153 Industrial Capacity.

Available IC: 153
Upgrades: The US starts with a requirement of 25.59 IC to upgrade 100% of our military with the latest technologies. This number will rise and fall erratically as new techs are upgraded and researched between budgets - overspending on this department will simply mean wasted Industry.
Reinforcements: The US starts with an on-paper requirement of 2.11 IC to supply new equipment and fresh recruits for training and peacetime rotation of manpower. Our practical requirements may be less, but failing to spend anything in this department will see our military slowly atrophy. Again, overspending on this department will be a waste of industry.
Supplies: The US requires 14.99 IC spent on supplies every year in order to fully supply the United States Military with all of the food, munitions and spare parts it needs to function effectively. It can be noted that we can effectively import supplies from other nations, if we do not wish to spend our native industry on this matter!
Production: While this has no formal requirements, this is one of the most important sectors of our industry as it represents what new projects have been approved by the US Government to be built, be they new warships, factories, planes or army divisions. We currently have 49.04 IC worth of ships and aircraft queued in the production lines, but we can continue or put hold on these constructions as Congress decides. This includes the two half-finished Aircraft Carriers Yorktown and Enterprise, as well as the necessary aircraft to man both of them.
Consumer Goods: Under my personal leadership, we have reduced the demands of the consumers to just 59.67 IC, just shy of 60, although this could fluctuate wildly (depending on what happens). Producing enough goods for the consumers is extremely important as failing to do so could lead to economic relapse into the worst lows of the Great Depression!

It should be noted that the United States has a vast surplus of every industrial resource and is currently the world's wealthiest nation despite our problems, and we are well benaeth our theoretical industrial capacity!
 
Last edited:
Stated Intentions of the US Ministers:
(This is a brief summary of what the current administration of Ministers have planned and what they want to do if you support them with funding. Like any good politicians, I imagine they're amenable to the ideas of certain members of Congress if they're bribed with more support or Congress demands it! If we get new Ministers, their plans could change dramatically, just as a disclaimer.)

Armaments Minister: It is the opinion of the Armaments Minister that we can best strengthen the United States by looking internally first. To this end, I wish to support the construction of new factories, both in our industrial heartlands in the east but also in the under-invested west, so that our country becomes less reliant on one half of the nation for success. To this end, we are also hoping to construct up to five new railway and highway routes linking the west and east together. A line linking Seattle and Eastern Montana would cost 3 IC, a line linking Portland and Salt Lake City would cost 5, a line linking San Francisco and Salt Lake City would cost 8, a line linking Salt Lake City to the Great Plains would cost 2, and a line linking San Diego and Santa Fe/Albequrque (running through Phoenix) would cost 5 IC. These infrastructure projects would enhance our ability to ship goods to the west coast and build our countrymen's experience in construction projects in a quick and practical manner, but are considered second tier compared to the importance of building new Factories, and can wait until later (although it is hoped that the practical knowledge gained from the construction will aid in constructing IC complexes).

Army Minister: The US Army is currently undergoing a restructure under its new Chief, Douglas MacArthur. We are preparing to focus the new military on a combination of firepower and mobility to compensate for our lack of manpower. Existing infantry divisions are being restructured to a 3-regiment system, and we would like to begin producing units of heavy artillery to supplement these divisions - we are also looking into plans to convert our Horse Cavalry, equipping them with trucks produced by General Motors and training them on how to use this effectively - it is also our hope to later invest in brigades of light and medium armour as well as more of this Motorized Infantry, so as to use our superior fuel supply effectively! The Army is certainly the most important branch as it will be we who engage the enemy, look them in the eye and take their land! The Chair Force and Navy do not need anything more than they already have.

Air Force Minister: The US Army Air Force is an area of our military that has been sadly underrepresented compared to nations in Europe. No other branch of the Military allows us to use our high ratio of Industry to Manpower in the same way! By producing vast quantities of planes, we can fuel them with our deep oil wells and knock the enemy out of the sky. Once we've established superiority on the air, we can pummel the enemy ground forces into dust using our bombers! The USAAF has plans to expand our number of interceptors and to look into the production of light bombers that can dive in and strafe enemy infantry with machine guns or strike enemy armour with bombs, and hopes Congress will support this admirable cause.

Navy Minister: The Army may occupy the land and the Air Force may rule the skies, but neither would be of any use were it not for the Navy. We are the First and most important line of both offence and defence in the US Military - our battleships are the shield that enables us to defend our Country and its vast trading networks, and without us the Country would be helpless to invasion by any enemy. At present, the US Navy is not able to seriously outnumber either the Japanese or British Navy - in an ideal world, we would expand our sea forces so that we could do both simultaneously, so that no country could ever threaten the US again! Currently, we are looking to expand our number of carriers and cruiser escorts, although continual advancement is being done into larger and more powerful battleships that can engage the enemy surface fleet and send it to the bottom, our fleet is currently considered adequate in that department with fifteen fully operational battleships, yet only three carriers.
 
Derahan said:
So, I changed it as you asked, not totally as you asked, but i hope that i do as i dont have access to the game right now, i might be able to do a more detailed reconstruction when i get home.
Click to expand...

That looks much better :)

And thank you very much for your posts, Saithis! That should help the less experienced figure out what is what.
 
=Jake Manson, Senator for Arizona, Member of the Socialist Party=
The Manson Plan proposes the following guidelines:

* Foreign Policy: Isolationist.

* Build or modernize? Modernize our Education, Industry, Navy, and Air Force.

* Proposed budget for IC:
  1. Minimal investment in Upgrades.
  2. Maintain the required minimal investment in Reinforcements.
  3. Import as much of our needed supplies as possible from abroad, exploiting our resource surplus for these ends.
  4. Maintain sufficient Consumer Goods production to ensure public stability.
  5. Complete all queued Naval production, then continue with 25 IC invested in the expansion of the Navy, and naval bases.
  6. Complete all queued Air Force production, then continue with 25 IC invested in the expansion of the Air Force, and air bases.
  7. No production should be allocated to the Army, barring a dire threat to the Continental US itself.
  8. All remaining production should be allocated to the expansion and improvement of the industry and infrastructure of the United States.

* Leadership: 18 for science, 10 for intelligence (primary focus should be internal), 5 for officers, 0 for diplomacy.

* Proposed tech budgets: 5 for Navy, 5 for Air Force, 2 for Army, 5 for General, and 1 for Education.

* Duration: 2 years. After this time, the situation will most likely have changed enough that, at minimum, a revision will be required.

The Manson Plan provides a clear, decisive plan of action for our government, yet does not serve to hamstring it or straightjacket our armed forces.
 
Last edited:
The Secretary of the Navy receives a telegraph, from Senator Manson, requesting an informal meeting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back