• 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.
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 sounds reasonable. The extra 7 points would be for 1 ic in Atlanta, and radar in Wake. As the coastal forts finish, I suggest replacing with another level of coastal forts in the same provinces. When the infra finishes, I would suggest airfields be produced for Guam and Wake. When the 12 ic for the 3x1 escorts finishes, I suggest radar for Wake, Guam if Wake is maxed out. Any savings gained due to increased practicals may be put towards upgrades.
Thank You.
 
(( I cannot get my plans fixed today, is it possible to extend the deadline by 24 hours? Homework & flu make me a sad panda :( ))

This sounds reasonable. The extra 7 points would be for 1 ic in Atlanta, and radar in Wake. As the coastal forts finish, I suggest replacing with another level of coastal forts in the same provinces. When the infra finishes, I would suggest airfields be produced for Guam and Wake. When the 12 ic for the 3x1 escorts finishes, I suggest radar for Wake, Guam if Wake is maxed out. Any savings gained due to increased practicals may be put towards upgrades.
Thank You.

We will go with Senator O'Halloran's proposal.

((Sorry to hear you aren't feeling well, Chimina; take as much time as you need!

Also, SOL, I think you've confused research with IC, at least as your last post suggests.))
 
We will go with Senator O'Halloran's proposal.

((Sorry to hear you aren't feeling well, Chimina; take as much time as you need!

Also, SOL, I think you've confused research with IC, at least as your last post suggests.))
LOL, you are right. I thought he had figured out how much ic we each had to spend. As my slots open up, replace the techs currently researched with these in this order:
1) Education
2) Air Launched Torpedo
3) Heavy AA Guns 36
4) Supply Org 3
5) Supply Transport 3
6) Supply Production 6
7) Civil Defense 2
8) Naval Air Target 2
9) Port Strike 2
10) Naval Strike 3

I know some of these are military techs, but appropriate civil techs are to far in advance to research at this point.
 
LOL, you are right. I thought he had figured out how much ic we each had to spend. As my slots open up, replace the techs currently researched with these in this order:
1) Education
2) Air Launched Torpedo
3) Heavy AA Guns 36
4) Supply Org 3
5) Supply Transport 3
6) Supply Production 6
7) Civil Defense 2
8) Naval Air Target 2
9) Port Strike 2
10) Naval Strike 3

I know some of these are military techs, but appropriate civil techs are to far in advance to research at this point.

What's worked well in the past is to have four techs for every slot, in your case 7 slots. Could you please submit a complete plan with the following information?

1. What you plan to spend your IC on
2. What you plan to spend your LS on.

I don't remember if there's anything in the queue or not -- I'm pretty sure you've got some coastal forts. Also, it makes it a little easier for me to print out my cheat sheet if you send it to me via PM :)
 
I've asked Tom to send along a build plan for the Army and Air Force with Chimina's illness. I know I speak for everybody on the thread when I say "Get well soon!"

I'm going to update in the next few hours with Tom's stuff so we can keep things moving.
 
Timeline of Events: January 1, 1940 to July 1, 1940

Before unpausing: construction begins on 1 CL, 1 parallel build of 3 escorts, 99 serial builds of 2 convoys, 99 serial builds of 1 escort, 99 serial builds of 1 IC, and parallel builds of 3 Marine divisions (3 MAR + 1 ENG), 3 Ranger divisions (3 MTN + 1 ENG), 2 TAC wings, and 3 INT wings. Central Planning 1 and Heavy Bomber Training 4 are cancelled.

January
January 7, 1940: Nuclear Research completed. Begin research of Isotope Separation by executive order. ((Whether or not we ultimately decide to build nukes, I intend to go all the way to civilian nuclear research.))
January 8, 1940: Medium Fuel Tank 1 completed. Begin research of Air-Launched Torpedo 1.
January 10, 1940: Agriculture 6 completed; begin research of Education 3.
January 14, 1940: Research completed on BB Engine 5 and Schwerpunkt and Blitzkrieg 2. Research begins on BB AA 4, Small Arms 4, and Infantry Support Weapons 4.
January 17, 1940: Carrier Group Doctrine 2 finished; continue research.
January 28, 1940: UK stops influencing us.

February
February 5, 1940: Decryption Machine and Combat Medicine 2 finished; begin research on Heavy AA guns 2 and Supply Org. 3.
February 7, 1940: Assault Concentration 3 finishes; begin research on Light Artillery 4.
February 8, 1940: Completion of 3 Armored Divisions (1 ARM x 2 MOT); deployed to Culpepper, Fredericksburg, and Woodbridge pending further deployment orders. ((These are the 'ghost divisions' that I upgraded at once; let me know where these are supposed to go.))
February 11, 1940: Single Engine Aircraft Armament 1 finished; begin Fighter Pilot Training 4.
February 14, 1940: Mech. Offensive and Encryption Machine 2 finished; begin research on Infantry AT Weapons 4 and Supply Trans. 3.
February 15, 1940: Large Warship Radar 1 and Advanced Aircraft Design finished. Research begins on INT Tactics 4 and Carrier Hangar 5. ((Note to Tom: You can't research any aircraft radar until RADAR 2.))
February 19, 1940: Cruiser Warfare 1 finished, start research on Small Warship RADAR 1.

March
March 8, 1940: Carrier Engine 5 finished; start work on Small Warship ASW 1.
March 12, 1940: CAS Pilot Training 3 finished; research continues.
March 16, 1940: Arty Barrel and Ammo 4 finishes; research continues.
March 17, 1940: Arty Carriage and Sights 4 finishes; research continues.
March 22, 1940: CL Crew Training 2 complete; begin research on CL AA 5.
March 29, 1940: 1 NAV deployed to Washington, DC.

April
April 2, 1940: Germany DOWs Luxembourg.
April 6, 1940: Luxembourg surrenders.
April 9, 1940: Finland mobilizes (??).
April 10, 1940: Germany DOWs Belgium.
April 13, 1940: Germany DOWs Netherlands.
April 19, 1940: CL Escort Role 2 finishes; research continues.
April 26, 1940: DD Crew Training 1 finishes, begin research on CL Main Armament 5.

May
May 1, 1940: Air Launched Torpedo 1 finishes; research continues.
May 2, 1940: Twin Engine Airframe 1 finishes; begin research on Twin Engine Aircraft Armament 1.
May 3, 1940: CL Engine 5 finishes; begin research on Basing 2.
May 5, 1940: Germany wins Battle of Bastogne.
May 7, 1940: Germany DOWs Norway.
May 8, 1940: Radar 2 is complete; begin research on Supply Production 6.
May 17, 1940: Rigged elections fires. We get the -1 dissent.
May 30, 1940: Small Arms 4 and Infantry Support Weapons 4 finish. Research begins on ARM Gun 3 and ARM Reliability 3.

June
June 1, 1940: USSR claims Bessarabia.
June 2, 1940: Germany wins Battle of Nancy. Second Vienna Award fires; Hungary gets Transylvania.
June 10, 1940: South Africa joins Allies.
June 13, 1940: French win at Metz.
June 19, 1940: Mass Assault 3 finished; research continues.
June 20, 1940: INF Warfare 3 finishes; research continues.
June 22, 1940: Canada joins Allies.
June 24, 1940: USSR annexes Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Nat China annexes Mengkukuo (!!). Light Arty 4 finishes, begin research on ARM Armor 3.
June 25, 1940: Ethiopia joins German alliance against the Allies. Not the brightest idea from my opinion.
June 29, 1940: INF AT Weapons 4 finished; begin ARM Engine 3.

July
July 1, 1940: Tactical Command Structure 3 finishes; Superior Firepower begins.

State of the Union incoming.
 
State of the Union: July 1940

My fellow Americans,

I do not know how much longer we can stay out of this war. In March of this year, I had hoped I could report to you, Senators, that Germany had decided against further aggressive actions. I regret that I cannot. Germany's first target was Luxembourg.

luxdead.jpg


In April, Netherlands and Belgium found themselves on the receiving end of Germany's hateful acts. Norway was also attacked and Finland, out of sheer terror, mobilized a few days afterwards.

newwars.jpg


norwar.jpg


As we speak, Paris is almost certain to fall within in the next week or two.

europemapv.jpg


Hungary and the Soviet Union have also benefited, adding lands that each claimed had been ancestral possessions.

hungaryyoinks.jpg


sovietclaims.jpg


baltsgone.jpg


While all of this is going on in Europe, the future of freedom and liberty of Asia looks much brighter. A brave counterattack by our friends in China has driven Japan out of Mongolia and they continue to push into Manchukuo.

surprisingsetback.jpg


asiamap.jpg


Our own nation is stronger than ever. A purely partisan attack by a Republican Congressman has been shown to be entirely baseless, and our nation is the stronger for it.

riggedelections.jpg


However, we must consider what our next action should be. At the moment, only Germany, Slovakia, and Ethiopia have formally joined the war in Europe, while Canada and South Africa have elected to sign with the Allies. What shall our course be? That, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, is up to you.

Thank you, and good night.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special bonus Norway map!

norwayx.jpg


Neither Belgium nor the Netherlands has surrendered, at this point, because of their colonies; I can't imagine they'll last much longer. Note that Japan has not attacked the Dutch yet.

We need to vote on two major things:

1. Do we want to put every decision to a vote? The decisions are all uniformly beneficial for the US, so I think voting on them en bloc might be a wise strategy. The laws, as always, will be left to proper Senate votes.

2. Do we want to formally join the Axis, Allies, or Comintern at this point? Aligning at this point doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Of course, any other bills the Senators wish to propose are acceptable as well. Please submit a vote on the above questions by Wednesday at 10 PM (-6 GMT). If there are any other bills, please have them proposed and co-sponsored by that point.
 
This war must be ended ASAP. Mobilize and join the Allies.

- Elexis Sinclaire (R - MA)
 
This is not our war, nor do we want it to become our war, non-intervention till we are directly attacked.
I would however support a Cash and Carry policy which allows the belligerent nations including Allies and Axis to buy American equipment and ship it themselves.

Senator Peter Dawson, MD
 
Last edited:
Polls:

Faction
Allies: 2
None: 1

Decision Making Authority to President
-no votes recorded-

Senator Sinclaire brings up a good point. Mobilization will be a separate vote altogether; you may safely assume we will address it if we do join the Allies or Axis, but do not include that thought in your voting.
 
((Note to Tom: You can't research any aircraft radar until RADAR 2.))

((D'oh. I originally did include that in my plan, but then I started switching techs around for efficiency... and forgot to check the ETA on Radar 2.))

While all of this is going on in Europe, the future of freedom and liberty of Asia looks much brighter. A brave counterattack by our friends in China has driven Japan out of Mongolia and they continue to push into Manchukuo.

I am overjoyed to see that the Chinese have repelled Japan's vicious invasion! Perhaps the failure of his armies will convince Emperor Hirohito to save his country from the clutches of the generals presently leading Japan to her destruction. Of course, if Japan plans to follow Germany's road to conquest... perhaps it is time that we act directly.

Though I am loath to delegate more authority to the bloated executive branch, particularly when it is led by a man who dismisses my requests for an impartial investigation into General MacArthur's court-martial as "baseless allegations," I reluctantly vote Aye for delegating decision-making authority to the President, in the interests of national security.

Finally, like my esteemed colleagues Sinclair and Sinclaire, I propose that we join the Allies as soon as our military preparations allow. The German invasion of Norway gives the Germans access to heavy water - a material critical for atomic research. Our research into the atom has demonstrated that such material could enable the development of an atomic bomb - a device of such terrible power that it can destroy an entire city in a single blast. We cannot, and will not allow Germany to develop such weapons... and, if need be, we will resort to force of arms to keep these weapons out of Hitler's hands.
 
I vote Nye for the delegating decision-making authority to the President, the powers of the Congress should never be placed into the hands off one man we only need look to Germany, Japan, Italy and the Soviet Union to see the effect such power has.

Senator Peter Dawson, MD

Senators,
On the matter of joining the war against Germany and the Axis on the side of the Allies, I cannot believe that any Senator would vote to join a war which in no way involves us or currently effects us, let us not forget what our forefather George Washington said of foreign entanglements
"he great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities."

Let us not forget the lesson of the last war, war is never the answer let us apply diplomatic and economic pressure to all belligerents currently involved in war.

Regards
Senator Peter Dawson, MD
 
It has been said before and I will say it again, we cannot stand by and watch Europe destroy itself in an another bloody war. If this war is allowed to be dragged on too long the entire world will be plunged into chaos! We must protect the democratic interests of our country and those who would stand by our side! Therefore I vote Aye on joining the Allies.

As for the matter of decision making authority I fully agree with Senator Dawson, never should the powers of congress be placed in one man alone. It is not safe. Thus I vote Nay on the issue.

- Senator John Linton, D-FL
 
((Avindian, did you do 99 separate runs of ic? It was supposed to be 1 series run of 99 ic(basically a factory per year or so.)))

Gentlemen. This is still a European problem, not an American one. Let Germany know that the Monroe Doctrine is fully in effect and German units will not be tolerated in the Western Hemisphere. On the other hand, Hitler's belligerence cannot be ignored. We should continue our military build up, especially the USN. We need more carrier task forces. Germany seems to have no carriers, so our BB's should be in the Atlantic, while our CV's should be in the Pacific. This is just a thought, not a directive. We are neutral, and should remain so unless attacked.
Nay on joining a faction at this juncture.

Mr. President. While we understand your concerns over how long it often takes congress to reach a decision, I do not think we should move away from Constitutional governance. I vote Nay on the issue of delegating our powers to the president.

RE "Cash and Carry". Senator, your policy violates the tenets of neutrality imo. We should not be selling weapons to either side. Nor should we give weapons, materials or any other aid to belligerents of either side.
Senator Richard Newman (R), Georgia.
 
Gentlemen!

I strongly believe we should not align us to any faction. However, as stated by some senators, I believe we should be aware of Hitlers further action and continue to build up our military. It might be that we should involve ourselves soon, as Hitlers aggression is completely unprovoked. Furthermore I will accept delegating more power to the president. I do have full faith in President Roosevelt's abilities and commitment to our nation.

- Senator Charles Beckendorf, D-MA
 
Last edited:
I believe General MacArthur is a capable general and henceforth vote for the President to make the decision as our President is a wise man with capable intellectual capacity.

Anyway, I vote we immediately join the Allies in their plight against Hitler's Reich.

- Senator Mary Philipps, SD-CA
 
New poll:

Faction
Allies: 5
None: 2

Extended powers
Yes: 2
No: 3

Other comments:

Senator Newman, it is 99 factories in serial, not parallel. Does that answer your question?

To make something clear; if we join the Allies, it will immediately throw us into the war with Germany. Now, that doesn't mean we have to formally commit any troops right away, and I imagine we wouldn't, but we would need to talk strategy before the next update. So Tom and Vrael, be thinking about that. We also need to discuss the division of naval and air assets into theaters, and who ultimately "owns" (read: assigns missions for) said assets. I'd like all the Chiefs, Commanders, and SecWar to chime in on this.

We also have one more thing to vote on (it's partially RP but partially in-game): who controls the special forces? (Marines/paratroopers). Please vote for either Presidential control or Theater Commander control.
 
Senator Newman, it is 99 factories in serial, not parallel. Does that answer your question?
It does, thanks.


To make something clear; if we join the Allies, it will immediately throw us into the war with Germany. Now, that doesn't mean we have to formally commit any troops right away, and I imagine we wouldn't, but we would need to talk strategy before the next update. So Tom and Vrael, be thinking about that. We also need to discuss the division of naval and air assets into theaters, and who ultimately "owns" (read: assigns missions for) said assets. I'd like all the Chiefs, Commanders, and SecWar to chime in on this.
Before we can decide that, we need to know what type of naval and air strategies we will be adopting. Naval first: A "fleet in being" strategy would not help our goals at all, so I am sure we would not adopt that. Basically our choices are between a "decisive battle" strategy or an "open seas/base control" strategy. Mahan's strategy of decisive battle basically said the navy's job is to hunt down and destroy the enemy navy. A strategy of base control and open seas basically means that the job of the navy is to protect various sea lanes for convoys to transit the oceans safely while seizing enemy bases to give us places from which to stage further attacks while denying the enemy the same. Any naval engagements are incidental to these missions. Meaning that as long as we get the bases, and the convoys get through, it doesn't matter if we sink enemy ships or not. You basically render the enemy naval forces irrelevant.

We have similar decisions to make regarding airpower. Should we adopt a decisive battle naval strategy, we may want to assign any naval bombers to the control of the senior theater naval commander. For the rest of the air forces, it comes down to whether we intend to attack enemy forces, or to attack the enemy's will and capacity to wage war. If we intend to use air power as "mobile artillery", then the aircraft should be assigned to the land generals responsible for the specific fronts.

These questions would be more easily answered if we knew what the projected forces availability would be on the date we plan to enter the conflict. Barring that, what are the projected availability for a "random date" say December 7th 1941? (( :p ))



We also have one more thing to vote on (it's partially RP but partially in-game): who controls the special forces? (Marines/paratroopers). Please vote for either Presidential control or Theater Commander control.
Are you asking ai vs human control here?
 
I do think big picture strategy is worth discussing, and I welcome an open and honest discussion about how we want to exercise our forces.

President Roosevelt

((No; this is either I have manual control of the special forces or the Theater Commander has manual control of the special forces.))