Selling Warships

[unmerged(10977)]

Oh yes, they were selling lots of Dreadnoughts.

Sultan Osman I - bought by Turkey from Britain but confiscated by the UK and renamed HMS Agincourt. The ship was actually indended for Brazil (as the Rio de Janeiro), but the brazilians opted out because of financial difficulties.

Reshadieh - also under construction for Turkey. Renamed HMS Erin as she was taken over by the UK.

HMS Canada was ordered by Chile as the Almirante Cochrane. The ship was taken over by the Royal Navy during WW1 and then handed back to Chile.

And the Kongo was indeed a dreadnought built in the UK for Japan. The rest of the class was built in Japan, but I think the turrets were built in Britian.

Regarding the Argentinian dreadnoughts, the Rivadavia Class: "To respond to Brazils dreadnoughts, Argentina asked British and German yards to submit variou designs, then combined the best features of them and ordered the ships from American yards, an action which caused much controversy at the time."


Read more at:

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/aj.cashmore/britain/british-dread.html

 

[peo]

Originally posted by Pwyll
They may have produced such things under license put they did not develop them on their own and that is where the real cost is.

They designed some of them also.
Mainly rockets.

 

[Pwyll]

All of Iraqs missle technology was based with modifications on Soviet and Chinese models with probably some Czech and French in there to....from the scuds...to the Tammuz and the Al series....We all know how effective they truly were as well....You could almost compare the US to fighting the natives in colonial days.

 

[unmerged(2695)]

The point is that in the Vic period there was a free international market in arms. Arms production was very much a private industry. Technnology was freely traded.

I don't think any country should be capable of controlling military innovations. Once the technology was known it was either copied or sold.

The restrictions on the building of armies and navies should be financial and industrial, not technological per se. Raising a modern army will either cost money, buying weapons, or require a specfic level of industrial progress for cannon foundries, gun factories and chemical industry.

One possible diplomatic action may be to allow countries to buy weapons in your country.

 

[stnylan]

peo

It is a matter of concept.

The means of achieving that end are important, but it is the idea that is revolutionary - or that it how I see it. Fisher had probably 2 really revolutionary concepts about HMS Dreadnought.

The 'all big-gun ship' and the idea of speed.

The turbines are just a means to an end. Without the concept they would have been nothing.

I suppose interestingly enough it shows differing views - you seem to view the engineering as being more important than the ideas, which are what I think is important.

No matter, I imagine the game will be able to cater both our needs

 

[peo]

Yep

 

[N Katsyev]

Imperialism had an effective way of handling this in that to build a military unit be it ship or man you had to have so many "armaments", you could produce them of course as part of your industry, but if you couldn't produce enough, or any at all (Zulus) you had to go shopping, either that or no army for you. Obviously, this was very muchly over-simplified and i'd like to see it a bit more diversified in Victoria. Maybe split it up into different types of weapons, and make it possible to sell ships after so much production time. Much like in HoI a ship could take so much "industrial points" and the proper type of arms and munitions for x period of time, then it would be sold for capital. Whereas in arms dealing, you have "armaments" from Imperialism split into:

Infantry Arms - Used primarily in the creation of and reinforcement of infantry units, and to a very small extent during battle. This would represent rifles, sidearms, bayonets, helmets, regulation equipment, grenades, etc.

Cavalry Arms - Used primarily in the creation of and reinforcement of cavalry units, and to a very small extent during battle. This would represent carbines, sabres, lances, sidearms, regulation equipment, grendades, etc.

Artillery Equipment and Oridnance - Used primarily in the creation of and reinforcement of aritillery units, and to a very small extent during battle. This would represent various models of actual cannon and lumber, wheels, and regulation equipment of the artillerymen themselves, sighting devices and the like.

Naval Equipment and Ordinance - Used during the creation and repair of naval warships. We could use this a broad term for all manufactured pieces that come together to form the great fortresses of the sea.

Land Munitions The fuel that lights the fire, ammunition for all the weapons in the hands of the soldiers. Used primarily during battle and to a lesser extent during the creation and reinforcement of land military units, artillery, cavalry, infantry.

Naval Munitions Again, the shot that goes in the cannon and sends other vessels to the bottom. Used primarily during battle and to a lesser extent during the creation of naval military units.


With this system we would see the various manufactured goods used to create our military units, and developed independantly in the industrial complex and therefore sold independantly on the world market if possible. While the two munition types would again be developed and sold independantly however not as much for the creation of units but their continued use, constantly being drained when combat is taking place, much like the supplies of HoI. The manufacotured goods would also to a very small extent be drained during battle, as things would inevitably need repair and replacement. This way we would see certian nations becoming probably more specialized (and even to a greater extent by reseraching certain technologies and the like) and giving us a more realilistic world arms market. It would be great to be able to control the price at which you offer as well. Say Russia is out-producing her competitors in infantry arms, she could offer a lower price than say could England who is producing much more naval munitions and is currently working on two or three battleships being ordered by other powers. Food supply for armies should be handled by that section of the industrial complex, i'll give more thought to this...

 

[peo]

Thye problem would be to differentiate between different tech levels.
For example if Russia can only make muskets and brittain can make bolt action rifles.
A musket will be much cheaper to make so russia would be able to outcompete brittain unless we have different types of weapons also.
And they we will have to many things to trade.

 

[steveh11]

Originally posted by Timothy Ortiz
I can see a nation selling wooden warships, but Dreadnaughts? I wouldn't want another nation with modern naval vessels in an era where navys reigned supreme no matter how much money I was offered unless they were a strong long time ally with compatible interests.

Nope. Britain built most of Japan's navy, and several ships in the grand Fleet were originally meant for Turkey, and one for Argentine iirc.
Steve.

Edit: I see that the question was answered in more detail above!

 

[Pwyll]

Originally posted by peo
Thye problem would be to differentiate between different tech levels.
For example if Russia can only make muskets and brittain can make bolt action rifles.
A musket will be much cheaper to make so russia would be able to outcompete brittain unless we have different types of weapons also.
And they we will have to many things to trade.

This could be debatable as well though...just suppose that although Russia may be able to make 100 or so muskets cheaper...Britain because of her advanced industry...could make 5000 muskets even cheaper based on one/one over scale....once factories are retooled...
Although costs and manufacturing may be cheaper in Russia on a per capita basis....factories could change that equation quite a bit

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Will building a large navy piss off other naval powers? I'm thinking of the wrangling that went on between Britain, Germany, France, the US and Japan to maintain the 'Freedom of the Seas', thank you Lord Nelson .

I'm pleased to report I live in one of the VIC period's greatest shipyards, Jarrow. Over fifteen hundred ships of every conceivable type launced 1850-1934. Including HMS Resolution.

 

[Finnish Dragon]

Originally posted by snuggs
Will building a large navy piss off other naval powers? I'm thinking of the wrangling that went on between Britain, Germany, France, the US and Japan to maintain the 'Freedom of the Seas', thank you Lord Nelson .

I'm pleased to report I live in one of the VIC period's greatest shipyards, Jarrow. Over fifteen hundred ships of every conceivable type launced 1850-1934. Including HMS Resolution.

Well, UK should build a lot of ships anyway. I remember that they wanted to have at least as large fleet as the next two Great Powers. I guess that UK would be pissed off if other powers will start building a lot of ships. I wonder how Paradox is going to implement the British "Naval Superiority Doctrine".

Historically naval race between UK and Germany irritated the government of UK. They thought that they could have used the extra money spend on naval race better to promote reforms in UK.

 

[Pwyll]

Things like this I think will be left upto the player...let the player choose guns or butter...

 

[supergamelin]

The British not only built warships but a lot of the world's merchant navy. All those came out from the same private yards. At the turn of century Glasgow may have produced as much as 50% of the world merchant shipping. Military technology traveled widely though each nation kept some secret "wonder" weapons. New explosives, machine guns .....
The weapons market remained rather free, with countries at war sometimes still buying weapons or equipment from each other, through neutral intermediaries.

Even non idustrialized nations could field modern armies as long as they had enough cash to buy the weapons. Mastering the technologies was not as critical as having enough money to buy an army.

Of course backward economies did not generate enough money to buy enough weapons, but the main factor remained hard cash.