Rule The Waves 3 - A Graphical Experiment - Complete

[X] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
[X] A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.
 
[X] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.

[X] A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.

Screw it, we've got a whole bunch of our multi purpose destroyers down already that can cover most everything else, let's see if we can fit a decent carrier in before the government comes for our budget. Probably not the 90+ plane one though.
 
[x] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
[x] A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.
 
[X] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
[X] A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.
 
[X] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
[X] A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.
 
[X] Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
[:V] Two new carriers with space for 72 aircraft.
 
Another Happy Time
Adhoc vote count started by 4WheelSword on Jun 20, 2024 at 7:28 AM, finished with 9 posts and 8 votes.


Tensions are rising with Italy, a nation allied with Germany. What do we do? Practice appeasement - we surely cannot fight them conventionally.
We have budget coming free, and the aviators clamour for new ships: A new carrier with space for 72 aircraft.



Carrier Warfare
For the first time in over a decade we begin design work on a new carrier, one that rivals the Joffre in size, if not in capacity. The Bearn-class will be 42,000 tons displacement, with a capacity of 72 aircraft aboard (for a complement of 40 fighters, 20 attackers and 12 specialist aircraft). Reliable gas turbines will drive her to thirty knots, 130,000 horsepower produced by these remarkable modern engines. Air defence will be provided by a multi-layered set of systems - A twin arm medium SAM launcher forwards of the conning tower, eight 75mm guns in twin mounts, rapid firing against incoming aircraft, a tertiary layer of six radar-directed 40mm autocannons and then a final defence of three anti-missile CIWS. She will, of course, be able to carry our most modern radars and electronic systems. With a projected service life of thirty years, she had better be.

We lay down the first of them, aptly named the Bearn, in September of 1971 with a projected completion date of January 1975.

Foreign Affairs
The Italian Duce insists on belligerent rhetoric about Nice and how it is 'rightfully Italian'. We try to ignore him, but the southern French are inflamed about the matter. Perhaps once they would have agreed with him, but it has been a century now. A month later, Germany cancels its alliance with Italy and suddenly the Mediterranean Fascists are in a very different diplomatic position. Several submariner captains can be seen discussing the best ways to conduct attacks in the shallow waters of the inland seas there, and the fleet air arm is conducting training operations to ensure the bases there are ready for action.

We still hope it will not come to that, but if it must...

Economic Woes
A sudden slump in the economy strikes, and we feel safe enough protesting against cuts given the state of play with Italy. We do still suffer a reduction, but it's a small one and one that will not stop us laying down a second carrier when the first of the Poignard-class destroyers join the fleet. This second carrier, the Bois Bellau, is laid down in March as planned and will be with the fleet in mid 1975.

It also does not stop us from launching a network of communication satellites, Frances first, a system that will be devoted to land and sea inter-unit communications, reducing transmission lag and enabling us to better command ships at sea. Launched by rocket from our bases in the Middle Congo, these will be a great boon to our operations.

We also begin work on the modernisation of the Republique Francaise-class, our older, first generation angled deck carriers. Her 125mm guns will be replaced by modern, auto-loaded 75mm guns to provide better AA fire with less weight dedicated to them. This allows the expansion of crew quarters to accomodate modern provisions for the ships complement. They also gains radar directed AA and CIWS systems, though notably there is not enough displacement available for a SAM system. All of this work will take just four months to complete.

It is August of 1972, and we have some 4 million francs available to us. What should we do with it?
[ ] Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war
[ ] Build a third Bearn-class carrier
[ ] Build additional missile cruisers
[ ] Build additional fleet escorts
[ ] Write-in
 
[X] Build additional missile cruisers

With their SAMs, they can join our destroyer arm as either escorts for the carriers, while still being capable of independent operations.
 
[X] Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war

We slashed our plane count pretty heavily in the first round of budget cuts, so I think it would be useful to bring that number back up again if we think we may end up fighting Italy in the Med. Even just reaching our previous numbers would be something like a 50% increase in airframes we've got in the land bases IIRC.
 
[X] Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war

If we're fighting in the Med, land based air can hit anywhere and everywhere; more than any other theater we can get some serious mileage out of this.

If there's still money left after that (and there probably should be)
[X] Build additional fleet escorts - more missile destroyers and corvettes
 
[X] Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war
We can but hope for a winnable war.
 
[X] Build a third Bearn-class carrier

DECKS DECKS DECKS DECKS

[X] Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war

If we're fighting in the Med, land based air can hit anywhere and everywhere; more than any other theater we can get some serious mileage out of this.

If there's still money left after that (and there probably should be)
[X] Build additional fleet escorts - more missile destroyers and corvettes
The problem with land-based air is that the AI tends to send out unescorted strikes which get massacred by the enemy CAP. LBA's great for scouting, and acting as a follow-up to target damaged ships after your initial strike's depleted the CAP barrier, but relying entirely on it results in insane aircraft losses which we cannot afford. Meanwhile, if you can get six carriers and two dozen DDs with SAMs, that's basically an "I win" button.
 
Last edited:
The problem with land-based air is that the AI tends to send out unescorted strikes which get massacred by the enemy CAP. LBA's great for scouting, and acting as a follow-up to target damaged ships after your initial strike's depleted the CAP barrier, but relying entirely on it results in insane aircraft losses which we cannot afford. Meanwhile, if you can get six carriers and two dozen DDs with SAMs, that's basically an "I win" button.

Granted it has those limits, but it's cheaper and faster than building more flattops. In an ideal world we'll have time and budget for both; I hesitate to count on either given how this playthrough has gone. If the politicians were less prone to slashing us to the bone at every turn I'd be advocating for your position because it's objectively better... I just don't think we're going to have the opportunity to pull it off.
 
[X] Build additional missile cruisers

We've started to rebuild our strike forces, and from the naval secretary's alternating obsession with destroyers and subs I think we have a good base of smaller escorts - Let's get some more flexible surface strike and escort assets in the water.
 
Doctrinal Developments
Adhoc vote count started by 4WheelSword on Jun 21, 2024 at 7:21 AM, finished with 11 posts and 10 votes.


What should we do with it? Refill our airbases to maximum capacity in case of war



Restocking our Airbases
We begin our work by deploying additional aircraft to almost every Mediterranean airbase, a broad swathe of Bloch MB.321s and Liore et Olivier LeO.313Bs. We then move on to other airbases, expanding some, deploying more aircraft to others and generally enhancing our forces overall. The key, in the Med at least, will be the rapid deployment of sufficient anti-submarine forces to counter the Italian boats, with enough airborne ASM platforms to crush the Italian surface fleet.

The MB.321 swing-wing fighter and interceptor

We begin expansion work at Heraklion, Tunis, Mers el Kebir and Durazzo, covering the Southern and Eastern parts of the Mediterranean more capably. We also begin work on a trio of missile batteries - one in Southern France, one in Corsica and one in Albania.

Concerned about tensions leading to war, the government negotiates an alliance with Spain. They are, somehow, the only nation to ever support us properly in a war and having them at our backs in an inevitable conflict with Italy will be a powerful thing. We also lay down a third Bearn-class carrier, the Lyon, expanding our future carrier force considerably.

The Bloody Minister
He's back, and this time, he wants destroyers. He wants twenty, and we certainly cannot afford twenty of our Poignard-class. It is doubtful we can even afford another six while building three carriers, but we must also consider the needs of the fleet. Mine-layers, sub-chasers and sweepers are all always in short supply, and a small, capable vessel would not go amiss. Thus, two types of ships built on the same hull - the La Combattante is a minesweeping destroyer, trading away modern ASW equipment for the best anti-mining technology. She carries a twin 75mm gun turret and a four-pack SSM missile launcher as her primary armament.

A variant on the same hull, the L'Alycon, is a 32-knot submarine chaser with enhanced sonar systems and the full array of anti-sub rockets. She does not, however, have the capacity for even a single missile tube and thus should be kept away from combat situations where possible.

We do, once we have laid down fourteen small, multi-role destroyers, have the budget for six of the Poignard-class and thus we lay those down as well.



Questions of Doctrine:
We currently design our shells for oblique penetration. What should we do?

[ ] Maintain the current design doctrine.
[ ] Switch to standard AP shells.
[ ] Switch to Large Bursting Charge.
[ ] Switch to Underwater Performance.
We could design our missiles to plunge into the water just before striking a target, functioning as torpedoes. Should we?
[ ] We should, these would be excellent against enemy warships.
[ ] We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics.
We currently maintain 'adequate' supplies of missiles in peacetime. Should we change this?
[ ] Yes, reduce our stocks to save money.
[ ] Yes, increase our stocks to empower our fleet.
[ ] No, this is fine.
Missile batteries - we now have three HSSM stations around the Mediterranean. They are expensive to build but cheap to maintain. We should:
[ ] Construct more, as and when the budget is available.
[ ] Maintain the current set as test beds.
 
[X] Switch to standard AP shells.
[X] We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics.
[X] No, this is fine.
[X] Maintain the current set as test beds.


Regular AP shells are good enough for shooting lightly armoured targets. The primary role of the missile strike is damaging the enemy's missile systems (both surface-to-surface and -air), so we want to be hitting the superstructure. Once we get carriers ito service we should increase stocks, but getting carriers into service at all is more important. Magazines on the coastal batteries aren't deep enough to be worth it outside of chokepoints like Albania, and we don't want to be fighting that close to Italian airfields anyways.
 
[X] Switch to Large Bursting Charge.
[X] No, this is fine.
[X] Maintain the current set as test beds.

This is about the time where lots of the new ships aren't built with that much armor, if any at all, so I think a large bursting charge will do fine if we end up needing to punch through splinter protection. Anything with heavier armor like that Austrian SC is a higher priority for a missile anyway.

The idea of diving missiles is fun, but I've got no real beef with either of the the options so pass voting on that. And while I would normally go for improving our missile stocks and forces, with our budget history making sure that 3rd carrier we managed to squeeze in doesn't get interfered with during construction is a good call.
 
[X] Switch to Large Bursting Charge.

Gun penetration is increasing, and armored targets are becoming more scarce - while it'll still be useful to carry AP shells, I think we can focus more on the destructive impact once they hit.

[X] We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics.

Now is not the time to try for radical departures from well tested technology. Our standard missiles can kill an enemy ship well enough.

[X] Yes, increase our stocks to empower our fleet.

A wartime shortage of missiles could be catastrophic, crippling our fleet's offensive punch and ability to defend itself. We should make sure this does not happen - though priority should still go to completing the carriers.

[X] Construct more, as and when the budget is available.

Give our enemies no reprieve, no safe place to hide. Death can come for them from the sea, from the air, or from land. Though these installations should be behind both the carriers and the establishment of missile stocks - if we cannot afford to build them due to other commitments, no great loss.
 
[X] Switch to Large Bursting Charge
[X] We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics
[X] Maintain the current set as test beds.
[X] No, this is fine.
 
[X] Switch to standard AP shells.
[X] We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics.
[X] No, this is fine.
[X] Maintain the current set as test beds.
 
A Quiet Year
Adhoc vote count started by 4WheelSword on Jun 22, 2024 at 8:12 AM, finished with 5 posts and 5 votes.


We currently design our shells for oblique penetration. What should we do? Switch to Large Bursting Charge.
We could design our missiles to plunge into the water just before striking a target, functioning as torpedoes. Should we? We should rely on striking the upper works to disable weapon systems and electronics.
We currently maintain 'adequate' supplies of missiles in peacetime. Should we change this? No, this is fine.
Missile batteries - we now have three HSSM stations around the Mediterranean. They are expensive to build but cheap to maintain. We should: Maintain the current set as test beds.



Political Developments
Tensions continue to rise with autocratic Italy, creating broad concern that a war could start at any moment. Elsewhere in the world, Britain grants independence to Bermuda. Everything comes to a head as Serbia pushes against Italian influences that still remain in the Balkans. We call for an international peace conference, hoping to ameliorate the threat of the Italians. Nothing comes of it, but it does at least reduce the risk of war.

We develop some new technologies that reduce the top-weight and reload time of SAM launchers, and thus we return to the protected cruiser design previously seen with the Suchet-class. The Montcalm-class trades the four heavy SSM tubes for four medium SSM tubes in order to fit a twin-arm SAM launcher rather than a single-arm launcher. This new class would slot directly into cruiser divisions to enhance anti-air firepower without compromising surface warfare capabilities significantly.

Germany and Italy sign an alliance with perhaps the worst timing we have ever seen. Hopefully we will stay out of another pointless war with them both.



It is January of 1975. World Tensions are spiralling. The first of our new fleet carriers are about to arrive, and we have budget to spare.

What should we build?
[ ] Large Armoured missile cruisers
[ ] More Bearn-class carriers, updated for the most modern technology
[ ] Protected missile cruisers of the Montcalm type.
[ ] Something else - write in.
What should our Foreign Policy be?
[ ] We should throw out lot in with the soviets and crush Japan.
[ ] We should take war as it comes, and fight it in our own ways.
[ ] We should smash Italy while we have the chance.
[ ] Something else - write in.

Weirdly short one because nothing happened. I managed tensions and built ships. Such is life.
 
Back
Top