Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to World1945. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Inability To Reform
Topic Started: Sep 14 2008, 04:58 PM (705 Views)
USSR
Member Avatar
Proletarii vsekh stran, soyedinyaytes!
[ *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
You're right. I never took a serious look at what you wrote. I took a moderate look at it, but never got into it BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO DO IT! It's not because I was like, "Oh, fuck Andi and this shit." No, it was more of a...I'm on campus until 10PM every fucking night trying to get my shit done for school and I don't have the time to really look into that. Furthermore, it does me no good to look into those numbers when I have no idea if they are legitimate numbers. I needed some basis to cross check and verify their validity before implementing them into the game.


Well, then you would have to agree to me, that you can't say if my forces are underfunded or not, because you've never checked the facts.

The time thing is a lame excuse. If I would be in a situation comparable to yours, I would have resigned as admin, but instead, you've spammed the forum with accusations.

Why do you always take GB as an example? Because other's proved that their forces are well funded.

Quote:
 
#2 - As I was doing budgets this last time is when I started the next call for help. Those budgets were already done for the most part. I started that thread so we could have a more refined model for analyzing the 1952 budgets. That thread speaks for itself.


I did a system, that was easy to use, included information and was also able to be played with modifiers for the different situations like peacetime, wartime and so on. But you rejected it for unknown reason. This could have been used to analyse the budgets and verify if the forces are underfunded or whatever. But instead of adopting, you ignored it.

Instead of talking about the numbers, you've started your crusade against countries with draft. I've quoted a lot of stuff, searched in libraries, on the internet and supplied you with the best information I could get. But again and again they have been ignored.

And I know why: Because they proved, that your model has been wrong and mine has been right. But you can't accept this fact.

It would have been better, if you would have concentrated on the numbers and instead of trying to make unsubstantiated accusations in regards to military fundings.

Frankly, I am happy, that Simon is back on board, because unlike you, he has substantiate knowledge in regards to military spendings.
Soviet Union
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Great Britain
Member Avatar
Land of Hope and Glory
[ *  *  * ]
Ethiopia
Sep 18 2008, 02:49 AM
UK was spending 3.875 AFTER gross increases under the Simon era where he was spending less than 2% on military.


You continually refuse to look under the non budget spending were multiple times I have pointed out, we at least doubled the amount spent on the military.


1946
GDP $347,035,000,000
15,130 million spend on defence.
%4.3

1947
GDP $371,739,000,000
15,040 million spend on defence.
%4

1948
GDP $421,644,960,750
21,130 million spend on defence.
%5

1949
GDP $458,538,894,816
22,657 million spend on defence.
%4.9

1950
GDP $486,989,219,324
28,878 million spend on defence.
%5.9


1951
GDP $518,887,013,189
30,396.5 million spend on defence.
%5.8

And these numbers are NOT including Nuclear Weapon research which fell under Atomic Energy.

1946

Quote:
 
Defence Spending:

RN
750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (1st year of 5)
500 million for modifications to HMS Vanguard
315 million on Royal Marines operational budget
250 million for completion of Battle class destroyers
250 million for cruiser development programme
125 million for Gallant class destroyer flotilla
125 million for Weapon class destroyer flotilla
125 million for frigate development programme
125 million for modifications to Audacious class aircraft carriers
2565 million

RAF
150 million for 32 Bristol Brabazons
240 million for 72 de Havilland Comets
250 million for 250 Gloster Meteor
250 million for 500 de Havilland Vampire
120 million for 240 Spitfire Mk XXIV
120 million for 120 de Havilland Hornets
120 million for120 Bristol Battleaxes
240 million for 360 Hawker Sky Furies
325 million for 375 Avro Lincolns
1815 million

Army
125 million for 500 3.75" AA guns
125 million for 250 5.25" AA guns
200 million for 1000 Centurion main battle tanks
150 million for 500 155mm SPG
125 million for 1250 25pdrs
250 million for small arms development
125 million for T92 240mm SP rights and development
125 million for 125 240mm SPH
375 million for Defence Future Development
500 million for SPGH development
500 million for Main Battle Tank development
375 million for Armoured Personnel Carrier development
500 million for Advanced Weapon Development
200 million for RPGW and RR Development
3750 million

Operational Defence Funding:

Royal Navy: 2500 million
Army: 2000 million
Royal Airforce: 2500 million



1947

Quote:
 
Defence: $9,665,214,000
Military Pay and Benefits: 3500 million
Equipment and Facility Maintenance: 2000 million
Radar Network Modernization: 500 million
C3I modernization: 500 million
Anti-Aircraft Defence Network: 250 million
Royal Navy Operational Funding: 300 million
Army Operational Funding: 325 million
Royal Air Force Operational Funding: 300 million
Royal Marines Operational Funding: 75 million
Equipment Development: 1000 million
Munitions: 500 million

Total: $9250 million
Surplus: $415.214 million

Defence Procurement: $3,624,455,250
750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (2nd year of 5)
625 million for 2 Hermes class Carriers (1st year of 4)
50 million for long range gun development
Total: 1425 million

250 million for small arms (250000 assault rifles, 25000 LMG)
50 million for GPMGs, HMGs and Maxim Guns
200 million for 1000 Centurion main battle tanks
50 million for 625 25pdr SP gun/howitzers
35 million for 375 155mm SPGHs
25 million for 250 8" SPGHs
20 million for 125 240mm SPGHs
50 million for 250 multiple rocket launchers
25 million for 250 3.75" AA guns
35 million for 125 5.25" AA guns
100 million for 2500 Land Rovers
20 million for 1000 2.5ton lorries
50 million for 2500 120mm recoiless rifles
50 million for 500 25mm quad AA vehicles
25 million for 500 mortar systems
15 million for 250 40mm twin AA vehicles
Total: 1000 million

300 million for 375 Gloster Meteor F4s
250 million for 625 de Havilland Vampire Mk.IVs
250 million for 150 English Electric Canberras (delivered from October)
95 million for 250 Avro Lincolns
50 million for 25mm ADEN cannon development
25 million for ordnance procurement
280 million for 40 Supermarine Archangel (delivered from December)
60 million for 500 Vickers Viceroy
30 million for 250 Handley-Page Hastings
50 million for 75 Vickers Valorous
25 million for 50 Bristol Britannia
Total: 1365 million

Total: $3790 million
Deficit: $166 million

Defence Future Development: $1000,000,000
100 million on future large aircraft carriers
50 million on carrier long lead in items
200 million on long range jet bomber
75 million for production readiness development of Canberra
250 million for guided weapons development
200 million on advanced jet fighter development
25 million on artillery development
50 million on rocket development
50 million on helicopter development

Total: $1000 million


Special Defence Appropriation for Iowas and Des Moines: 2000 million


1948

Quote:
 
Defence: $10,962,768,980

Military Pay and Benefits: 5000 million
Equipment and Facility Maintenance: 2000 million
Radar Network Modernization: 500 million
C3I modernization: 500 million
Anti-Aircraft Defence Network: 250 million
Royal Navy Operational Funding: 300 million
Army Operational Funding: 325 million
Royal Air Force Operational Funding: 300 million
Royal Marines Operational Funding: 75 million
Equipment Development: 1000 million
Munitions: 500 million

Total: $10750 million
Surplus: $212,768,980

Defence Procurement: $6,851,730,612

750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (3rd year of 5)
625 million for 2 Hermes class Carriers (2nd year of 4)
625 million for 2 Hermes class carriers (1st year of 4)
400 million for 4 super cruisers (1st batch)
250 million for 8 Daring class super destroyers
125 million for 16 new construction frigates
100 million for 16 fast ASW frigate conversions
75 million for 50 Hawker Sea Falcons
50 million for long range gun development
Total: 3000 million

250 million for small arms (250000 assault rifles, 25000 LMG)
50 million for GPMGs, HMGs and Maxim Guns (6250, 2500, 1250)
320 million for 500 Centurion Mk 4 main battle tanks
50 million for 625 25pdr SPGHs
35 million for 375 155mm SPGHs
25 million for 250 8" SPGHs
20 million for 125 240mm SPGHs
25 million for 150 7.25” SPGs
50 million for 375 4.5” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 250 7.2” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 125 10” multiple rocket launchers
25 million for 250 3.75" AA guns
35 million for 125 5.25" AA guns
50 million for 5000 Austin Champions
100 million for 2500 Land Rovers
20 million for 1000 2.5ton lorries
25 million for 500 5 ton lorries
30 million for 375 10 ton lorries
50 million for 2500 120mm recoilless rifles
50 million for 500 25mm quad AA vehicles
67.5 million for 120mm mortar systems
Total: 1705 million

300 million for 300 Gloster Meteor F4s
250 million for 500 de Havilland Vampire Mk.IVs
250 million for 100 Hawker Falcons
375 million for 100 Supermarine Sunbursts
625 million for 250 English Electric Canberras (delivered from October)
175 million for 250 Avro Lincolns
50 million for 25mm ADEN cannon development
25 million for ordnance procurement
360 million for 60 Supermarine Archangel
60 million for 50 Vickers Viceroy
30 million for 125 Handley-Page Hastings
45 million for 50 Vickers Valorous
Total: 2550 million

Total: $7255 million
Deficit: $404 million

C.) Non Budget Spending

Defence Future Development: $1,000,000,000

375 million on future large aircraft carriers (cumulative 475 million)
50 million on carrier long lead in items (cumulative 100 million)
250 million on long range jet bomber
250 million for guided weapons development
200 million on advanced jet fighter development
25 million on artillery development
50 million on rocket development
50 million on helicopter development
Total: $1000 million

Special Defence Appropriation: $2,125,000,000
625 million for 2 Hermes class aircraft carriers
321.25 million for 500 Centurion Mk 4 MBTs.
400 million for 1000 Knight APCs
60 million for 10000 'Longbow'
30 million for 2500 'Crossbow'
13.75 million for 50 8" recoiless rifles
60 million for 250 105mm 'Archbishop'
50 million for 100 9.2" mortars
62.5 million for 50 12" superheavy guns
87.5 million for 25 15" howitzers
75 million for 15 16" guns
60 million for 200 40mm twin AA vehicles
120 million for 120 Westland Wizards
100 million for 50 Hawker Falcons
Total: $1500 million


1949

Quote:
 
Defence: $11,922,011,265

Military Pay and Benefits: 5000 million
Equipment and Facility Maintenance: 2000 million
Radar Network Modernization: 500 million
C3I modernization: 500 million
Anti-Aircraft Defence Network: 250 million
Royal Navy Operational Funding: 625 million
Army Operational Funding: 500 million
Royal Air Force Operational Funding: 500 million
Royal Marines Operational Funding: 125 million
Equipment Development: 1000 million
Munitions: 500 million

Total: $11500 million
Surplus: $422 million

Defence Procurement: $5,961,005,633

750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (4th year of 5)
625 million for 2 Hermes class Carriers (2nd year of 4)
625 million for 2 Hermes class carriers (1st year of 4)
400 million for 4 super cruisers (2nd year of 4)
250 million for 8 Daring class destroyers
125 million for 50 Hawker Sea Falcons
75 million for 16 new construction frigates
75 million for 16 fast ASW frigate conversions

Total: $2925 million

250 million for small arms (250000 assault rifles, 25000 LMG)
20 million for 100 7.25” SPGs
75 million for 125 4.5” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 125 10” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 500 3.75" AA guns

Total: $445 million

875 million for 350 Hawker Falcons
750 million for 200 Supermarine Sunbursts
625 million for 250 English Electric Canberras
432 million for 72 Supermarine Archangel
60 million for 50 Vickers Viceroy
25 million for ordnance procurement
Total: $2787 million

Total: $6157 million
Deficit: $96 million

C.) Non Budget Spending

Defence Future Development: $3000 million
1525 million on future large aircraft carriers (cumulative 2000 million)
500 million on long range jet bomber (cumulative 1000 million)
250 million for guided weapons development
250 million on Advanced Jet Fighter Programme
250 million on carrier long lead in items (cumulative 350 million)
125 million on rocket development
50 million on helicopter development
50 million for long range gun development
25 million on artillery development
Total: $3000 million

Foreign Aid: $3750 million
Sudan: 500 million
Eritrea: 750 million
France: 2500 million
Total: $3500 million

Special Defence Appropriation: $2000 million
400 million for 2 Alaska class battlecruisers
750 million for 1000 Centurion Mk 4 main battle tanks
600 million for 1250 Knight APCs
120 million for 60 Westland Wizards
80 million for 40 Avro Shackleton
50 million for Rolls Royce Armoured Cars
Total: $2000 million


1950

Quote:
 
Defence: $17,957,727,463

Military Pay and Benefits: 6250 million
Equipment and Facility Maintenance: 2500 million
Radar and Anti-Aircraft C3I Network Construction: 625 million (2/4)
Training and National Service Costs: 500 million
Munitions and Fuel: 500 million
Anti-Aircraft Defence Network: 250 million (4/6)

RN:
1000 million for 4 supercarriers (1st year of 5)
625 million for 2 Hermes class Carriers (3rd year of 4)
625 million for 2 Hermes class carriers (2nd year of 4)
500 million for 4 super cruisers (3rd batch)
250 million for 8 Daring class super destroyers
Total: $3250 million

RAF:
1250 million for 500 de Havilland Venoms
750 million for 250 Hawker Falcons
562.5 million for 150 Supermarine Sunbursts
450 million for 250 English Electric Canberras
Total: $3012.5 million

Army:
750 million for 1000 Centurion Mk 4 main battle tanks
375 million for 750 Knight APCs
250 million for small arms (250000 assault rifles, 25000 LMG)
250 million for 1250 25pdr SPGHs
140 million for 375 155mm SPGHs
125 million for 250 8" SPGHs
125 million for 5000 Shield ATGM
75 million for 100 Bristol Silver Hawk 24" battlefield rockets
75 million for 75 English Electric Violet Sun 36" battlefield rockets
Total: $1790 million

Total: $17953 million
Surplus: $4 million

C.) Non Budget Spending

Defence Future Development: $4500 million
1000 million on long range jet bomber (cumulative 2000 million)*
1000 million on supercarriers (cumulative 3000 million) **
1000 million on atomic submarine development (1st year of 4)
750 million on Advanced Jet Fighter Programme (cumulative 1000 million)
250 million for guided weapons development (cumulative 750 million)
250 million on carrier long lead in items (cumulative 350 million)***
125 million on rocket development (cumulative 300 million)
50 million on helicopter development (cumulative 100 million)
50 million for long range gun development (cumulative 100 million)
25 million on artillery development (cumulative 50 million)
Total: $4500 million

* To be payed entirely into the cost of the long range jet bomber project in 1951/52.
** Supercarrier fund of $3000 million to be payed entirely towards the cost of the supercarrier project as of 1950/51.
*** Long lead in items for 4 supercarriers in 1950, payed entirely towards the cost of the supercarrier project.

Defence Operational Funding: $3500 million
Royal Navy Operational Funding: 1000 million
Army Operational Funding: 1250 million
Royal Air Force Operational Funding: 1100 million
Royal Marines Operational Funding: 150 million
Total: $3500 million

Special Defence Material Appropriation: $3500 million
Royal Navy:
750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (5th year of 5)
125 million for 16 new construction frigates
125 million for 100 Fairey Gannets
100 million for 16 fast ASW frigate conversions
100 million for 50 de Havilland Sea Venom
100 million for 50 Westland Wyverns
50 million for submarine programme
Total: $1350 million

Army:
600 million for 1000 Knight APC
75 million for 800 Daimler Fox ARV
50 million for GPMGs, HMGs and Maxim Guns (6250, 2500, 1250)
50 million for 1000 Rolls Royce Armoured Cars
75 million for 125 4.5” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 125 10” multiple rocket launchers
25 million for 1000 Leyland Ranger 3.5t lorries
Total: $925 million

Royal Air Force:
450 million for 72 Supermarine Archangel
300 million for 150 Westland Wizards
250 million for 125 Gloster Meteor NF.12s
125 million for 125 Westland Whirlwinds
100 million for 75 Vickers Viceroy
Total: $1225 million


1951

Quote:
 
Defence: $19,458,262,992

Military Pay and Benefits: 8500 million
Equipment and Facility Maintenance: 2500 million
Radar and Anti-Aircraft C3I Network Construction: 625 million (4/4)
Training and National Service Costs: 500 million
Munitions and Fuel: 1000 million
Anti-Aircraft Defence Network: 250 million (5/6)

RN:
1000 million for 4 supercarriers (2nd year of 5)
625 million for 2 Hermes class Carriers (4th year of 4)
625 million for 2 Hermes class carriers (3rd year of 4)
500 million for 4 super cruisers (4th batch)
250 million for 8 Daring class super destroyers
Total: $3250 million

RAF:
1000 million for 400 de Havilland Venoms
900 million for 300 Hawker Falcons
562.5 million for 150 Supermarine Sunbursts
Total: $2462.5 million

Army:
750 million for 1000 Centurion Mk 4 main battle tanks
375 million for 750 Knight APCs
250 million for small arms (250000 assault rifles, 25000 LMG)
250 million for 1250 25pdr SPGHs
140 million for 375 155mm SPGHs
125 million for 250 8" SPGHs
125 million for 5000 Shield ATGM
75 million for 100 Bristol Silver Hawk 24" battlefield rockets
75 million for 75 English Electric Violet Sun 36" battlefield rockets
Total: $2165 million

Total: $17959.5 million
Surplus: $1499.5 million


C.) Non Budget Spending

Defence Future Development: $4500 million
1000 million on long range jet bomber (cumulative 2000 million)*
1000 million on supercarriers
1000 million on atomic submarine development (2nd year of 4)
750 million on Advanced Jet Fighter Programme (cumulative 1750 million)
250 million for guided weapons development (cumulative 1000 million)
250 million on carrier long lead in items (cumulative 600 million)***
125 million on rocket development (cumulative 425 million)
50 million on helicopter development (cumulative 150 million)
50 million for long range gun development (cumulative 150 million)
25 million on artillery development (cumulative 75 million)
Total: $4500 million

*Long range jet bomber fund of $2000 million to be payed entirely towards the cost of the Long range jet bomber project as of 1951/52.
*** Long lead in items for 4 supercarriers in 1950, payed entirely towards the cost of the supercarrier project.

Defence Operational Funding: $5662 million
Royal Navy Operational Funding: 1300 million
Army Operational Funding: 2700 million
Royal Air Force Operational Funding: 1500 million
Royal Marines Operational Funding: 162 million
Total: $5662 million

Special Defence Material Appropriation: $2275 million
Royal Navy:
750 million for 4 Lion class battleships (5th year of 5)
125 million for 16 new construction frigates
125 million for 100 Fairey Gannets
100 million for 16 fast ASW frigate conversions
100 million for 50 de Havilland Sea Venom
100 million for 50 Westland Wyverns
50 million for submarine programme
Total: $1350 million

Army:
600 million for 1000 Knight APC
75 million for 800 Daimler Fox ARV
50 million for GPMGs, HMGs and Maxim Guns (6250, 2500, 1250)
50 million for 1000 Rolls Royce Armoured Cars
75 million for 125 4.5” multiple rocket launchers
50 million for 125 10” multiple rocket launchers
25 million for 1000 Leyland Ranger 3.5t lorries
Total: $925 million
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ethiopia
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
USSR
Sep 18 2008, 01:45 PM
Quote:
 
You're right. I never took a serious look at what you wrote. I took a moderate look at it, but never got into it BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO DO IT! It's not because I was like, "Oh, fuck Andi and this shit." No, it was more of a...I'm on campus until 10PM every fucking night trying to get my shit done for school and I don't have the time to really look into that. Furthermore, it does me no good to look into those numbers when I have no idea if they are legitimate numbers. I needed some basis to cross check and verify their validity before implementing them into the game.


Well, then you would have to agree to me, that you can't say if my forces are underfunded or not, because you've never checked the facts.

The time thing is a lame excuse. If I would be in a situation comparable to yours, I would have resigned as admin, but instead, you've spammed the forum with accusations.

Why do you always take GB as an example? Because other's proved that their forces are well funded.

Quote:
 
#2 - As I was doing budgets this last time is when I started the next call for help. Those budgets were already done for the most part. I started that thread so we could have a more refined model for analyzing the 1952 budgets. That thread speaks for itself.


I did a system, that was easy to use, included information and was also able to be played with modifiers for the different situations like peacetime, wartime and so on. But you rejected it for unknown reason. This could have been used to analyse the budgets and verify if the forces are underfunded or whatever. But instead of adopting, you ignored it.

Instead of talking about the numbers, you've started your crusade against countries with draft. I've quoted a lot of stuff, searched in libraries, on the internet and supplied you with the best information I could get. But again and again they have been ignored.

And I know why: Because they proved, that your model has been wrong and mine has been right. But you can't accept this fact.

It would have been better, if you would have concentrated on the numbers and instead of trying to make unsubstantiated accusations in regards to military fundings.

Frankly, I am happy, that Simon is back on board, because unlike you, he has substantiate knowledge in regards to military spendings.

Quote:
 
Well, then you would have to agree to me, that you can't say if my forces are underfunded or not, because you've never checked the facts. - Andi


What facts? Again. I have no way of knowing that what you are providing me is a bunch of facts, or just a bunch of fluff. I needed sources. You never gave me sources. So how do I know that you are providing me is accurate?

My assumptions were based on payments to a number of western countries and what they spent on soldiers, as well as a number of third world countries and what they spend on paying soldiers.

It's fine to say that you have your maintenance accounted for, but it still makes NO SENSE whatsoever and ASB for these nations to have so much weapons and defense procurement, but to spend LESS than what they spent on it historically. Which is why, at one point in the last thread, I said that we were probably missing something in regards to the costs.

It makes NO SENSE for the militaries of the world to get farther ahead then where they were at this point in history with no trade offs whatsoever.

Quote:
 
The time thing is a lame excuse. - Andi


System Dynamics - 6 hours of lecture
Transport Phenomena - 4 hours of lecture
Thermal Fluids II lab - Design project
Numerical Methods - 4 hours of lecture
Biology - 3 credits
Biology lab - 1 credit, three hours a week.

I'm on a quarter system. We learn in ten weeks at my college what students at RPI learn over a semester. So you chew on that comment.

Work - 16-25 hours a week.

Quote:
 
If I would be in a situation comparable to yours, I would have resigned as admin, but instead, you've spammed the forum with accusations. - Andi


Again, I was brought on to assist with budgets, guide rules, make decisions regarding conflicts, and process orders. I was NOT brought on board to do military stuff. I delved into military stuff because NOBODY ELSE DID IT!

Quote:
 
Why do you always take GB as an example? Because other's proved that their forces are well funded. - Andi


They didn't prove shit. They proved that conscripts were being paid fine. That's fine, I backed off that significantly. But there was no proof that it they were okay in having massive militaries before their time while spending half what was spent historically at this time period.

But why do I use GB as an example. Interesting question.

Let's take a look at Matts numbers as an example

Quote:
 
Year---------In Game------------Actual

1946---------4.3%----------------20.9%
1947----------4%-----------------13.1%
1948----------5%-----------------10.8%
1949----------4.9%---------------9.87%
1950----------5.9%---------------7.6%
1951----------5.8%---------------9.8%


http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_year1949_0.html#ukgs302 (for all years)

Quote:
 
domestic product growing at an average rate of 3.5% from 1949 to 1955 - for the UK


Look at what Simon gave himself.

http://www.public.asu.edu/~adelsonr/his352/contemporary.html
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/eloranta.military

So why was I using the UK as an example? Because it's the ultimate example of what unbalanced this game. THIS IS WHAT RUINED IT FOR YOU!!!!

Look at the excel sheet and compare your GDP growth to the UK's. Think about what they did in regards to military development for themselves as opposed to what they let you do. Think about it for just a minute Andi. The deck was stacked against you the moment you took it over.

Quote:
 
It would have been better, if you would have concentrated on the numbers and instead of trying to make unsubstantiated accusations in regards to military fundings.


It was never unsubstantiated. THIS IS THE SHIT I WAS TALKING ABOUT! THIS IS WHAT UNBALANCED THE GAME!!! You think I was just pulling this shit out of my ass or something? Come on dude.

I may not know the exact cost of a piece of equipment, I may not know what a conscript makes, but I DAMN sure know that nations were underspending on their militaries as a percentage of GDP, and they were getting FAR better militaries to boot. That's not right.

Simon left because I called him out on a shit ton of stuff, those numbers above being one of them. Time and time again I called him out. I wasn't going to sit back and let him get his way because in the end it unbalanced the game.

Quote:
 
Frankly, I am happy, that Simon is back on board, because unlike you, he has  substantiate knowledge in regards to military spendings. - Andi


I think you need to strongly consider what you are saying here. I won't disagree with you here. I think Simon knows a ton about military spending and militaries in general. He's extremely knowledgable about military spending. You're very right.

But think about it. Simon knows all this stuff, but he STILL did what he did! Good God! Think about it.

Simon knew from the outset that he was unbalancing this game.

- Simon knew he was short changing his military spending
- Simon knew he was artificially inflating the abilities of his military
- Simon knew he was artificially inflating the growth of his nation
- Simon knew he was artificially inflating the performance of his colonies and commenwealth nations
- Simon knew he was telling a whole bunch of bullshit in his budgets like (33.5% for SA = low taxes when SA was taxed at 9% at this time period, yet SA had higher than historical growth rates. SA spending $25 per student in SA for "universal education." All he left everywhere he went in this game was a long line of bullshit.

Andi, look at what you're saying here. Simon unbalanced this game from the start. In the first year he pressured Provo to give him a sick budget performance. Once provo left and Eq did his budgets he pressured Eq to give him wicked high GDP. While I progressively called him out on his bullshit numbers, and bullshit policies, he KNOWINGLY ignored it all, and stayed the course because YOU GUYS didn't know any better.

As a result, in just a few years, Simon managed to spend a fraction of what was spent historically on the military. He avoided all the financial problems the UK faced, primarily the currency crisis. His commonwealth nations and colonies were infallible gems. He had complete and total ASB growth. And while short changing his military spending by a grotesque amount he STILL managed to garner enough nuclear weapons to BLOW YOU OUT OF THE GAME!!!

Think about that for a moment. Think about what you are arguing with me about.

And now you're in another game with Simon:

Another game where he's gonna do the same exact shit. Because Simon is a type A that's going to get his way in the game that he's running.

Quote:
 
I did a system, that was easy to use, included information and was also able to be played with modifiers for the different situations like peacetime, wartime and so on. But you rejected it for unknown reason. - Andi


I never rejected anything. You let me know when I said, "Nope, we can't do this. This is garbage. Your system sucks Andi." I'm sorry that you think, "I don't have the time right now to get in depth with this as a rejection. If you would have sourced it, if I could have verified it, I would have implemented it.

Quote:
 
But instead of adopting, you ignored it. - Andi


Again, I didn't ignore it. I have class. I have work. I was unable to get to it and really research it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Great Britain
Member Avatar
Land of Hope and Glory
[ *  *  * ]
Ethiopia
Sep 19 2008, 01:27 AM
Let's take a look at Matts numbers as an example

Quote:
 
Year---------In Game------------Actual

1946---------4.3%----------------20.9%
1947----------4%-----------------13.1%
1948----------5%-----------------10.8%
1949----------4.9%---------------9.87%
1950----------5.9%---------------7.6%
1951----------5.8%---------------9.8%


Either way, you were wrong, so, does this lend us to believe you in anything else?

Quote:
 
UK was spending 3.875 AFTER gross increases under the Simon era where he was spending less than 2% on military.


Not ONCE was that little spent, the nearest was at the start when lenience has to be granted because all this was newish.
And you MUST realize that he PURPOSEFULLY spread out new equipment to make it EASIER on his economy and help it GROW.
I cannot give you the formulas, be he has them, so unless you wish to talk to him directly, nothing you say will be taken seriously, as he told me personally you never gave him a chance from the start to listen to him.

And that does not show class in any sort.

And Simon is NOT running this game, He AND EQ both turned down Adminship for they want to play.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ethiopia
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
That's a crock of bullshit.

I approached him on numerous occassions from the outset. Not just him, but Provo when Provo was already here, as well as Eq to point out the purposeful errors in Simons ways.

This all started happening VERY EARLY in the game!

And if you notice, Simon did manage to modify some aspects of his budgets to conform to reality and away from his own personally distorted world vision where 33.3% tax rates in third world countries were "low."

After I pointed out some his errors, he adjusted them...a bit. Just a bit. A little bit of a fudge here and there. But he was still being completely ASB and distorting everything.

Matt, I think you need to consider just exactly what happened here. Simon wanted everything, and I mean EVERYTHING to go his way. He'd cheer on a random event in any other nation, but would piss moan about any little thing that happened throughout his entire empire that was negative. When reality set in, Simon got pissy. And as I progressively looked into what he was actually doing and called him out on it, he DELETED EVERYTHING HE HAD DONE and left.

Doesn't that tell you something? Ya know, the fact that he deleted everything? I'd really like to show you some of the PM exchanges we had, and some of the stuff that was discussed (not argued about) in the staff forums. But Simon deleted all that because you spend hours deleting your presence on a forum to do what exactly...

In regards to talking to him directly, I did it a lot. It was on a regular basis too. At the time he really didn't have a whole lot to say to me personally. All I ever heard from Eq was that Simon was pissy because things weren't a one way street for him. Burma is near civil war!!! NO!!! Problems in Malaysia!! NEVER! He was infuriated by the India transportation problem. Like that shouldn't have been issue. He actually thought that India could remain united forever. Simon was so convoluted in this game that he wanted to have moon colonies in 2000. Come on. But anyhow, I gave him a chance to listen: from the start. Guess what. I listened, but he really didn't change squat. He still spent a pittance on military. He still insisted that ridiculously high taxes for the time period were low. And he continued to try and fudge bullshit and pull wool over the communities eyes. He just didn't like the fact that somebody was calling him out on it. He had a narrow view of how things were going to play out in this game, and when I pointed out errors in his thinking, he freaked out and pouted.

And again, I'd kindly point some of that but...ya know...your saviour deleted his entire presence. All the posts he made in the staff forums where I POLITELY told him that his budgets were a mess are gone. So it's not like I can back that up.

So yeah, again, ask yourself, why did your messiah delete all this stuff?

And if you want to talk about class: How many times did Simon leave this game? Three? Four? Each and everytime he did it it was because I criticized him on stuff he was doing. Ask Simon if he has any of my emails or PM's left. You'll find that I was never sharp, never vulgar, never nasty. Yet, each and everytime I criticized him he flipped out and left because things weren't going his way. So yeah, who's the classy one?

Another fair point is that you say there was "leniancy" at the beginning in regards to those things. Come on dude. Simon KNEW this stuff. Simon KNEW that he was grossly short changing his military funding. And he knew he was accelerating his research beyong what would considered historically reasonable.

As to purposefully spreading out new equipment to make it easier on his economy. What a load of total phony bologna. Simon had a space program. Simon spent a shit-ton on nuclear technology and nuclear weapons in general. But the kicker is really the ACCELERATED nature of his research and development. I don't know what planet you are on, but when you accelerate research and production, the costs go up significantly over time. When you couple all of this, you don't end up with grotesque GDP growth. You retard growth. The idea that if you somehow spread out funding over a number of years and somehow end up with greater economic growth is total folly. If anything, it increases the net cost of the program.

So in short - let's review the Simon Darkshade perspective of the game

- Higher taxes than occured historically
- Very high military capabilities, although trimmed up some
- Same payments to programs, but spread out :eyeroll:
- Significant spending on space programs
- Significant spending on nukes and nuke tech.

And what does this result in!

- Enormous GDP growth. Unfathomable GDP growth
- A more advanced military
- A more robust military
- A military with a large number of nukes
- A Space program
- Commonwealth nations do splendid!
- All traditional conflict in his empire evaporates

Gimme a break Matt.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · OOC Talk · Next Topic »
Add Reply