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.
son of liberty said:
My proposed bill would leave the current budget unchanged except with regard to LS points. As soon as we institute the Gearing up for war decision, that should repeal the New Deal and allow us to move away from All Volunteer Army. As soon as we move away from Volunteer Army, my proposal for LS points would be as follows:

Leadership:

Officers: 35.29, or whatever the maximum number is at that time.
Diplomacy: 0
Espionage: 0
Research: 0 If education is being researched and is 3 months or less from completion, leave 1 point for education until it finishes. Then shift that point and the new points to recruitment.

My proposal would have us stay at max officer recruitment until we reach at least 101% of required minimum officers but not beyond 105%. At that point, I propose the following:

Leadership:

Officers: 4.04
Diplomacy: 0.25 (The president may use more for a short time at his discretion to make up for shortfalls caused by the above policy.)
Espionage: 1.0 (The president may use more for a short time at his discretion to make up for shortfalls caused by the above policy.)
Research: 30 remains for efficient study of new technologies.

This should carry us until the next budgetary session. Thank you.
Richard Newman (R) Georgia
Click to expand...

Mr President. I find myself in a state of outraged bewilderment. You say you implemented Newman-Sharpe, but you ignored the triggering event for the bill to come into effect. This resulted in the wasteful squandering of millions of taxpayer dollars((or however LS points are modeled)). The bill should not have went into effect until we went away from "all volunteer army". I was about to rebuke the CBO for being so far off on their estimate of ~100 days to complete the recruiting of our officers, but I see the problem was with the executive branch. I have included a copy of the bill with the relevant part highlighted for your attention.

((I think we just found our scandal, and MacArthur was the "fall guy"))
 
Gentlemen, Ladies, here is my suggested budget for 1940. I thank you for your attention and invite any questions. I am searching for a co-sponsor. Thank you,
Richard Newman, (R) Georgia


Leadership:

Officers: 0 Officer recruitment to resume AFTER we change away from all volunteer army.
Diplomacy: 0.29
Espionage: 1.0
Research: 34.0 remains for efficient study of new technologies.

Technology Plan:

Research efficiency should be our primary concern here. There is no use spending precious leadership on technologies that are too advanced to finish in less than a year. Primary focus should be on education in order to train our scientists, officers, diplomats and spies at greater rates whenever education is practical to research.


IC Distribution:

Upgrades: 15
Reinforcement: .25 this should cover retirements and any other needs.
Supplies: 0 unless we can no longer purchase all needed supplies via trade
Consumer Goods: 0
Production: 5.25 ic to finish current infra construction, 35 ic to finish current BB's, 11.25 ic to finish coastal forts, 15 for current naval bomber wing to be replaced by another, 12 ic for 3x1 escorts for our merchant marine, 4 ic for 2x99 merchant marine convoys, 4 ic for 1x99 merchant marine escorts. The remaining ic to be split by service chiefs, though I recommend a 1x99 run of troop transports, and a 1x99 run of factories.
 
Last edited:
son of liberty said:
Mr President. I find myself in a state of outraged bewilderment. You say you implemented Newman-Sharpe, but you ignored the triggering event for the bill to come into effect. This resulted in the wasteful squandering of millions of taxpayer dollars((or however LS points are modeled)). The bill should not have went into effect until we went away from "all volunteer army". I was about to rebuke the CBO for being so far off on their estimate of ~100 days to complete the recruiting of our officers, but I see the problem was with the executive branch. I have included a copy of the bill with the relevant part highlighted for your attention.

((I think we just found our scandal, and MacArthur was the "fall guy"))
Click to expand...

((D'oh! I did not look closely enough at your proposal; that's totally on me. Still, let's go ahead and blame MacArthur :D))
 
Senator Newman,

The Navy did it.

- MacArthur

((I love that of all the charges we can throw at him, MacArthur ends up getting sacked because of an administrative mix-up. Definitely better than anything I could have written. :laugh:))
 
No support for bills right now? Do I need to extend the deadline?
 
Avindian said:
No support for bills right now? Do I need to extend the deadline?
Click to expand...
Looks that way, unless you just want to accept mine for lack of opposition. :D
 
I will support Senator Newman's budget bill proposal since there are no other bills!

- Senator John Linton, D-FL

((Lack of activity gets punished by an auto-accepted bill!!)
 
son of liberty said:
Looks that way, unless you just want to accept mine for lack of opposition. :D
Click to expand...

That'll be what we have to do if we don't get another by 10 PM. Could you post a final draft here in the thread?
 
The Newman-Linton Bill:


Leadership:

Officers: 0 Officer recruitment to resume AFTER we change away from all volunteer army.
Diplomacy: 0.29
Espionage: 1.0
Research: 34.0 remains for efficient study of new technologies.

Technology Plan:

Research efficiency should be our primary concern here. There is no use spending precious leadership on technologies that are too advanced to finish in less than a year. Primary focus should be on education in order to train our scientists, officers, diplomats and spies at greater rates whenever education is practical to research.


IC Distribution:

Upgrades: 15
Reinforcement: .25 this should cover retirements and any other needs.
Supplies: 0 unless we can no longer purchase all needed supplies via trade
Consumer Goods: 0
Production: 5.25 ic to finish current infra construction, 35 ic to finish current BB's, 11.25 ic to finish coastal forts, 15 for current naval bomber wing to be replaced by another, 12 ic for 3x1 escorts for our merchant marine, 4 ic for 2x99 merchant marine convoys, 4 ic for 1x99 merchant marine escorts. The remaining ic to be split by service chiefs, though I recommend a 1x99 run of troop transports, and a 1x99 run of factories.

Richard Newman, (R) Georgia
 
Senator Newman, can you clarify what level of officer recruitment you recommend when we switch from All-Volunteer Army?

President Roosevelt

((Chiefs, I know there's a lot of flexibility in the Newman-Linton Bill for tech and IC distributions; I'll be happy to take your recommendations in thread or via PM.))

Please have construction, research, and deployment plans on my desk by Thursday at 10 PM CST (-6 GMT).
 
((LS would be 4 points reducing research to 30 points. This should keep us swimming in officers. If we hit a hard limit on officers, switch extra points back to research.))

Gentlemen, war is evidently interested in us even if we are not interested in it. It has been said that the best way to keep the peace is to prepare for war. Let us prepare. Let us build modern carriers and aircraft. Let us build marines capable of fighting in marsh, jungle, and capable of retaking any lost islands. Let us build strong armored divisions to protect our boys from harm. Chiefs, we the congress charge you with protecting our nation, while at the same time preserving as many of our men as possible.
Thank You
Richard Newman (R) Georgia.


Thank you senator Newman. While I applaud your thinking, I must point out that you have forgotten some of the less glamorous aspects of modern warfare that need to be addressed. Infrastructure and logistics win wars. We need more forward airfields and naval bases to deploy those aircraft and ships. We need forts to protect the men from attack. We need an interlocking net of radar stations to maintain observation and up to date intelligence on enemy activities. We need garrisons to defend the islands. Let us not forget the less "flashy" aspects of war and in so doing hamper our ability to wage war successfully.
Robert Wagner
Secretary of War
 
Last edited:
son of liberty said:
((LS would be 4 points reducing research to 30 points. This should keep us swimming in officers. If we hit a hard limit on officers, switch extra points back to research.))

Gentlemen, war is evidently interested in us even if we are not interested in it. It has been said that the best way to keep the peace is to prepare for war. Let us prepare. Let us build modern carriers and aircraft. Let us build marines capable of fighting in marsh, jungle, and capable of retaking any lost islands. Let us build strong armored divisions to protect our boys from harm. Chiefs, we the congress charge you with protecting our nation, while at the same time preserving as many of our men as possible.
Thank You
Richard Newman (R) Georgia.


Thank you senator Newman. While I applaud your thinking, I must point out that you have forgotten some of the less glamorous aspects of modern warfare that need to be addressed. Infrastructure and logistics win wars. We need more forward airfields and naval bases to deploy those aircraft and ships. We need forts to protect the men from attack. We need an interlocking net of radar stations to maintain observation and up to date intelligence on enemy activities. We need garrisons to defend the islands. Let us not forget the less "flashy" aspects of war and in so doing hamper our ability to wage war successfully.
Robert Wagner
Secretary of War
Click to expand...

((Okay, you're going to start freaking me out if you keep talking to yourself like this :D. Thanks for the clarification on the bill!))
 
Avindian said:
((Okay, you're going to start freaking me out if you keep talking to yourself like this :D. Thanks for the clarification on the bill!))
Click to expand...

((Mr President, I have no idea to what you are referring. Is someone else in the room? Newman

Senator Newman, good to meet you. The president and I were just talking about you. :p ))
 
(( Right, uh, production and tech plans. I'll send something along tonight. ))
 
Two rules for forthcoming bills:

1. The tech and IC distributions are now mandatory.
2. Chiefs and Secretaries of War cannot propose bills.

((The first makes for some very confusing plans that I receive; the second is so that we get as many people involved in the AAR as possible.))
 
(( That sounds like a good idea. I'm not sure if Chimina or SoL sent you any recommendations on tech/IC distribution, but I'm working up a compromise to it in my spare time between sprints of work. ))
 
Saithis said:
(( That sounds like a good idea. I'm not sure if Chimina or SoL sent you any recommendations on tech/IC distribution, but I'm working up a compromise to it in my spare time between sprints of work. ))
Click to expand...

((Excellent; no, I've not received anything yet, so if you have a good compromise, post it in the thread.))
 
(( Having just had time to load up the game and have a closer look...here's my proposal for the split of tech/IC, and I'll send my lineups to you shortly along with organization/deployment orders for those misc. ships and where I want them. ))

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, I have tallied up the industrial requirements of our fellow Senators' bill and proposed the following to the President for guidelines:

Navy: 35
Army: 0
Air Force: 15
Armaments: 36.5 (counting this for convoys/escorts as I can't remember exactly who is
Total: 86.5

That leaves 74.25 IC remaining, I would split up the extra IC like so:

Navy: 4.25
Army: 40
Air Force: 20
Armaments: 10

This would give us a total of:

Navy: 39.25
Army: 40
Air Force: 35
Armaments: 46.5
Total: 160.75

For the chiefs to use, with guidelines for what Congress expects laid down in the Bill. I would remind the Chiefs that failure to comply with what Congress desires may lead us to question your judgment and ability to lead our great country's armed forces. With 34 points of leadership allocated to research under the bill, I'd allocate it simply as:

Navy: 9 points
Army: 9 points
Air Force: 9 points
Armaments: 7 points

This should ensure that all branches of the military see strong levels of investment throughout the year, and that the United States Military does not fall behind in any one area. I hope the President will listen to my proposed addendum to the Newman-Linton Bill, and that this year's spending can proceed smoothly.

~ Senator Sarah Quentin O'Hanahan, D-OR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back