Gaebrael

The Greatest Nations: 1940

Mini NS:

Name of Nation: People's Socialist Republic of Albania
Inspirational Regime/Ruler: Enver Hoxha
Scholarly Article: michaelharrison.org.uk/wp-content/uplo..

@aladdin_sane

Danke.

The Greatest Nations: 1940

Also, I might note, not a single person has given me an article on their nation, and a few have yet to give me rulers, so if I could get a more exact mini NS from everybody who is still interested, that would be great.

Mini NS

Name of Nation:
Inspirational Regime/Ruler:
Scholarly Article:
Non-Natural Territorial Holdings (Colonies, conquered area):

The Greatest Nations: 1940

If the game's still open, I'd love to join. I'm thinking of playing the Ottomans, ruled by Abdul Hamid II who resisted being overthrown in 1909 and who refused to enter WWI. Thus, the Ottaman Empire was not dissolved by the Treaty of Versailles and remains a player in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. (This would probably change the holdings of @ZB1996 in the Middle East however.)

@chevalier

<Snipped quote by chevalier>

There would be a small problem with that... namely that Byzantium is a thing in this alternate universe and the only way for that to happen is for the Ottomans to be... euhm, non-existant.

That being said, I dont know if said player is still in this, so who knows, you might be lucky.

@Zoldyck

That may be a small problem, but certainly a workable one. It may be important to remember that for a time, both nations existed simultaneously. Byzantium could opt for a "mini" Byzantium, focusing more and Greco-Roman holdings and ceding most of Anatolia, save Constantinople and bits ad pieces of the western coast, to the Ottomans, who in turn would have decided to focus more on Arab holdings. Byzantium could also be a colonial power, which would give similar land opportunities. Crimean colonies in particular come to mind.

The Greatest Nations: 1940

@Gaebrael

So is the timeline 1925 or 1940?

@ZB1996

1940, I will explain a bit more about the lore soon.

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

An Idea I've used before to go beyond numbers when countries get involve in conflict is for the GM to provide them with a situation in which their troops encounter one another and they both prepare and present their interpretations/reactions of/to the situation and the GM can either choose one over the other ( if one faction decides they have Rambo who bites through Maus Tanks and needs 'nerfing') or attempts to blend both proposed interpretations into one 'official' conclusion with favour/victory leaning towards, whoever had the initial starting advantages of course, but also the person who showed the most realistic, detailed,tactically and strategically-savvy,convincing version of the scenario they were given.

@Winston Smith

Whilst the written component sounds all well and good, my problem is that I want it to matter what you choose you spend your credits on. Do you invest in better Pocket Battleships because you need to halt the advanced fleet of enemy heavy cruisers? Or are you a small navy that needs to manufacture and acquire through whatever means necessary more torpedoboats? Whilst writing out the battles works on the micro level of whose strategies win, it is also utterly arbitrary and doesn't really work on the macro level that well. It is hard to judge between certain macro strategies, as well.

Example

Player I: Fan out the ships and surround the gulf. They won't be able to exit.
Player II: (10 paragraph admiral POV response on how the torpedo boat managed to silently take out the battlecruiser and allow the Albanians to narrowly escape)
GM: Well, I have to give it to II. He had a very thought-out strategy.
Player I: That's not fair! I never authorized my battlecruiser to just get taken down randomly by a random torpedo boat! How am I supposed to know which out of 26 battlecruisers I need to make sure has a good officer so II can't just hope that my ship is ignorant!
GM Alternate Persona: Well, he has a point.
Player I: I should be able to write out my battlecruiser's response to the boat!
GM: But you are supposed to only be able to manage orders from the perspective of an admiral!
Player I: But I didn't know that suddenly admirals could just be on torpedo boats whenever!
Player II: To be fair, it isn't ahistorical. This singular Irish admiral once did this one thing where he toured on a toroedoboat! wikipedia.com/thatonetimeinallofhistory
Player I: But that wasn't even in combat!
GM Alternate Persona: Player II does have a point, no reason it wouldn't happen.
Player I: So who wins?
GM: This is why stats work better.

So I was hoping for more number-centric mechanics. Literally accompaniments are wonderful, but without numbers, there can never be a clear victor. Casualty counts are also impossible with this method, as are reliable budgeting schemes for armies and navies and such. A few POV paragraphs, however brilliantly they describe a strategy, are still going to feel forced when you mention exactly how many P-53s and F-52s were lost in the Battle of Edinburgh versus the Battle of Glasgow. Do you kinda get my point?
ALSO: EDIT: You are a Superpower, being that you still control a double digit percentage of the world.

The Greatest Nations: 1940

Things I need feedback and ideas for:
What should the battle mechanics be? I like the idea of each type of ship/tank/infantry/air force playing a different role, but I really want to flesh out the military mechanics. Thoughts? Ideas?

The Greatest Nations: 1940

@Gaebrael

I am quite impressed by the spreadsheet as it is most encompassing, keep up the stellar work.

@aladdin_sane

Thank you! :-) That means a lot.

<Snipped quote by ZB1996>

If i'm accepted we could discuss subsequent wars/history. You might have retaken some territories etc...

@Winston Smith

I apoligize for not getting to you sooner, but yes, you are indeed accepted! I praise the initiative!

The Greatest Nations: 1940

Also, not sure I mentioned it in the OP, I need Co-GMs! If anybody is interested, let me know!

The Greatest Nations: 1940

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

Aah, well in that case just fill in a parlementary republic :P

And to be honest... It's kind of an intimidating template. I'm not quite sure as to how it works, though I believe that there's a lot of influence drawn from a certain series of Grand Strategy Games, but I might be mistaken :P

@Zoldyck

I tried to add some guides in the actual sheet about why certain numbers are certain ways. It should hopefully be more intuitive once things get punched in. And if you are thinking of EUIV, you are indeed correct!

EDIT: Also, no problem with the gov thing. The way it works is that I fill out the red section after you reserve something, then you fill out the grey section.

The Greatest Nations: 1940

<Snipped quote by Gaebrael>

Neither, the Interbellum Republic was what I was going to use as a template... Though with Lithuania and Latvia included.
.
.
.
It will become clear when I have the CS done :P

@Zoldyck

Alright. I just need to know for filling in sheets. Also, what did you think of the template so far?

The Greatest Nations: 1940

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17SE2wn..
Here is the current spreadsheet for the nations. Just so you know I haven't been sitting on my ass for a week :-).
I still have Economy and Military left, but I am really proud of my policy support and position calculator. Thoughts?