|
Inability To Reform
|
|
Topic Started: Sep 14 2008, 04:58 PM (705 Views)
|
|
USSR
|
Sep 18 2008, 01:45 PM
Post #16
|
Proletarii vsekh stran, soyedinyaytes!
- Posts:
- 967
- Group:
- Official Members
- Member
- #123
- Joined:
- March 10, 2008
|
- 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
|
| |
|
Great Britain
|
Sep 18 2008, 10:14 PM
Post #17
|
- Posts:
- 1,851
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #33
- Joined:
- December 25, 2007
|
- 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
|
|
|
| |
|
Ethiopia
|
Sep 19 2008, 01:27 AM
Post #18
|
- Posts:
- 841
- Group:
- Official Members
- Member
- #70
- Joined:
- January 17, 2008
|
- 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.
|
|
|
| |
|
Great Britain
|
Sep 19 2008, 02:00 PM
Post #19
|
- Posts:
- 1,851
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #33
- Joined:
- December 25, 2007
|
- 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.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ethiopia
|
Sep 19 2008, 04:00 PM
Post #20
|
- Posts:
- 841
- Group:
- Official Members
- Member
- #70
- Joined:
- January 17, 2008
|
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.
|
|
|
| |