NationStates Jolt Archive

And for the global wars threat, Japan never likes large conflicts. The only time they actually actively joined a global war they got a kick in the ass and two A-boms, so... (no offence ment) I like to think what would have happened if Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbour...

Wonderful... I make a factbook, then check back, and sombody else got it... damn.

Ah, well. You did a hard job sofar. You'll be GBR and Conservative will be France if he wants.

I've been watching this RP for a while and I think I'd like to join, but I don't know what would be worth playing as. Any suggestions?

I've been watching this RP for a while and I think I'd like to join, but I don't know what would be worth playing as. Any suggestions?
Check your account, I sent you a TG with an idea I have.

Just for your information, I will never try to take all of China. The reason is simple, it is too big! Japan can never occupy such a large country without major problems in logictics, guerilla actions etc.

And remember, Bejing is just 90 kilometers from Liaoning...

Just for your information, I will never try to take all of China. The reason is simple, it is too big! Japan can never occupy such a large country without major problems in logictics, guerilla actions etc.

And remember, Bejing is just 90 kilometers from Liaoning...

I've moved my Imperial Capital to Luo Yang, as it is the ancient capital from around the era of Jesus Christ and the Romans.

Blackledge: You can not conceal the emigration of 200,000 Jews from Russia. Someone will talk, especially within a community as tightly knit as European Jewry. As Vienna happens to be one of the major Jewish population centres in Europe (along with Warsaw, the Hague, and Salonika), rest assured that the Austrian secret police will find out about the displacement of Jews from Russia and - because (and you would know this if you read my white paper at the start of the RP) the Hapsburgs are concerned about the Zionist movement - will inform the Foreign Ministry.

Sink Russian ships? No need. We'll just stop them and search them for illegal immigrants (meaning people without permission to emigrate to Palestine). If you gripe, too bad. We'll make up some song and dance about concern over white slavery (a big topic in 1912 - there was another Hague Convention that year, devoted to white slavery - that's how big a subject it was), and then proceed to remove the illegals from the ships in question and send them back to refugee camps in Austria for eventual "repatriation" (which will mean transportation to America, where they belong).

Lather, rinse, repeat.

As for our efforts on behalf of the Arabs, that will be posted in the next day or two.

Oh, and any weapons we find will be confiscated. I'm sure that something will make it ashore, but this is going to be a very, very long and tiresome effort. You won't get 200,000 ashore this year; you'll be lucky to get 40,000.

OOC:

Posted my Navy and airplane stuff over in the IC thread. I figured since we did not have an military thread, and that China is getting ready to build these things, I might as well put it with the IC stuff. :)

OOC:

Posted my Navy and airplane stuff over in the IC thread. I figured since we did not have an military thread, and that China is getting ready to build these things, I might as well put it with the IC stuff. :)I think it belongs in the factbook thread, but that's just me...

no Torpedo Boat?

I think it belongs in the factbook thread, but that's just me...

I don't think I ever got around to making one, unfortunately. :(

no Torpedo Boat?

My patrol boat is essentially an oversized Torpedo Boat- but then again, I'm not quite sure of the difference between patrol boat and torpedo boat. I do know that patrol boats are smaller than destroyers and are more faster.

I am sad to say that I will be withdrawing from this rp. I have seen no advancement in it and formally give all control of the Empire of Mexico to Narodna, to give to another who wishes to join this rp, they can use my FactBook entry and two rp entries such far. Thankyou and sorry for leaving.

-Thrashia

Thrashia, why don't you give this another week? I was on vacation last week, and several of the players were starting school.

Hmm...I will give it one more week. But only one. This rp needs some serious revamping for it to get back on its feet.

I've moved my Imperial Capital to Luo Yang, as it is the ancient capital from around the era of Jesus Christ and the Romans.

Just asking, when did you do that? Nice fleet you got, but the Japs will exterminate you :p

Hmm...I will give it one more week. But only one. This rp needs some serious revamping for it to get back on its feet.

Hmmm, wait till I start my Chinese invasion ;)

Hmmm, wait till I start my Chinese invasion ;)
That'll be fun, and possible allowe me to secure more power in Europe as the Allied forces are occupied defending China against Japan and Russia. That would allow me to retake the Alsace-Lorraine area, together with Poland and the benelux without immediate action from the other allied forces. As soon as the mainland is secure I can start invading Great Britain by sending transports across the strait, then redeploying the Wehrmacht to the east and conquer the rest of Russia. The head of states and head of governments of the other nations have of course died of ''food poisoning'' two days before my invasion.

Of course, this is purely fictional. I would never do such a thing in the IC thread...

That'll be fun, and possible allowe me to secure more power in Europe as the Allied forces are occupied defending China against Japan and Russia. That would allow me to retake the Alsace-Lorraine area, together with Poland and the benelux without immediate action from the other allied forces. As soon as the mainland is secure I can start invading Great Britain by sending transports across the strait, then redeploying the Wehrmacht to the east and conquer the rest of Russia. The head of states and head of governments of the other nations have of course died of ''food poisoning'' two days before my invasion.

Of course, this is purely fictional. I would never do such a thing in the IC thread...

Heh, the "Allied Forces" will take months to be there, and more than a year to get there in strength. I would bring China to it's knees quickly enough...

Hopefuly :D

The US joined WWI in early 1917, and was first active in mid 1918 I believe. Don't shoot me if I'm wrong with this!

I'm quitting the RPG. Joining as such an important nation in the middle of an RPG is a bad idea.
I keep finding out loads of information that I had no idea about, and it makes it too tough to RP.
Plus, I keep getting compared to the past Russia RPer(even though he left or something) and that gets old.
Lastly, apparently in this timeline Austria-Hungary holds dominion over all of eastern Europe, and is not the poor, divided nation it was in RL.
So I'm not going to waste your time and mess up your RPG. Cya later. If you decide to restart, telegram me, I'll join as anything, really.
Tsar-> :eek: :sniper: <-me

I'm quitting the RPG. Joining as such an important nation in the middle of an RPG is a bad idea.
I keep finding out loads of information that I had no idea about, and it makes it too tough to RP.
Plus, I keep getting compared to the past Russia RPer(even though he left or something) and that gets old.
Lastly, apparently in this timeline Austria-Hungary holds dominion over all of eastern Europe, and is not the poor, divided nation it was in RL.
So I'm not going to waste your time and mess up your RPG. Cya later. If you decide to restart, telegram me, I'll join as anything, really.
Tsar-> :eek: :sniper: <-meYou exagerrate my strength. I've simply outmaneuvered my enemies and made a lot of alliances. But my nation has its weaknesses. A clever player could exploit them - or realise that he could work with me as opposed to working against me. Ask Bogmihia (Roumania), who seems to be holding his own (in fact, he's doing far better than holding his own...).

I'm sorry that you thought I had to play cream-puff so that you could roll me over.

(As for the "weak, divided" Dual Monarchy impression, there's a sharp disagreement between historians over just how weak the Hapsburg Empire was. Some think it was destined to collapse, and some thought it could have survived just fine if it hadn't been caught on the wrong side of the Great War.)

OK, back to advertisement.

WE, do we have a British player? If so, can we get his name in lights?

Can we straighten out who the WZO player is? I'm guessing it'll be Spooty, now that Blackledge has tossed in the towel.

By my count, we need the following: An American player


A French player


A Russian player


A Mexican player (or not, depending)Have I missed anyone?

So far we need:

A British Player (the two who wanted haven't posted a damn thing)
A Russian Player
A French Player

We have a Mexican player, so...why do we need one?

And Relative Liberty, you strongly oppose me in my China campaign but you'll make good use of the diversion I create? :eek: That's not fair! :D

And Relative Liberty, you strongly oppose me in my China campaign but you'll make good use of the diversion I create? :eek: That's not fair! :DWelcome to the world of strategy ;)

We have a Mexican player, so...why do we need one?I said maybe; he gave us a week, and then said he'd quit if this didn't take off. Not sure what taking off is, of course...

WE, you should also add Great Britain to your list of 'open' Countries.

Boghimia: We're both partly right. France was the “protector” of Roman Catholics, the Austria (just the Empire, not Hungary, too) “protector” of the Orthodox Christians under the ecclesiastical government of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The article does not describe how these powers came to acquire this status, which leads me to surmise (perhaps incorrectly) that the old Crusader titles still meant something to the Turks. OTOH, it could have been simple chutzpah.

“In April 1853, France raised the level of its consulate in the city. It became a general consulate and announced its new function as the protector of the Roman Catholics. The Austrians followed suit and became the protectors of the Patriarchate. In 1903, the British Foreign Office was still refusing to raise the status of its consulate, although all the other European powers have already done so.

“Britain was less concerned with status, and more with economic concessions, such as the one gained by the British Khedivial line running the steamship route between Egypt and Palestine. The Austrians were running the mail-service and the French ran the train system. The country's and the city's infrastructure was now built and maintained by foreign powers.”

- The Rise and Fall of the Husaynis (http://www.jqf-jerusalem.org/2000/jqf10/husseinis.html), 1840-1922 (Part 1), Illan Peppe, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Issue 10, 2000

Thank you for the link.

A British Player (the two who wanted haven't posted a damn thing)

May I play as the British player? I had some other plans with some guys, but I realized that could both take some time to start and that I would basically be a weak puppet government to whomever I choose to ally with.

May I play as the British player? I had some other plans with some guys, but I realized that could both take some time to start and that I would basically be a weak puppet government to whomever I choose to ally with.
You're welcome! I'm playing the French and I wanted for a long time to propose an alliance to the British.

Latiatis, Britain you are! Make a factbook, aks a few questions about what the old British player did and start having fun!

New players, check the Recruitment Thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=441531). I've been posting "History Cliff Notes" that can help people get caught up. They're not comprehensive, but they can certainly help get you asking the right people the right questions!

Erm, well. You can call the Gotha G bombers (designed and build in 1915/1916) long range bombers. Though they had range of 800 km officially it was rarely on duty so far from an airbase. It was a far better flying machine than the slow and had to miss Zepplins.

I based my support aircraft on the German Fokker E1 fighter plane. With some further development, it is certainly possible. You could give as argument that the development in war is at a much higher pace than in peace. Japan has been preparing for war for more than 5 years now.

And ofcourse, the planes won't roll out of the factories next week. I will probably take one/two years or something.As you have pointed out yourself, the Gotha G was built in 1915. As you know, there was a war raging back then, the situation is not quite the same in this rpg.

The Fokker E1 was also built in 1915, during at time when the High Command on both sides were pushing to create effective counters to enemy air raids. This is not the case now.

I'm not talking about bombs of 500 kg. I'm talking about...50 kg bombs or something. Don't know exactly what they used in WWI but a load of 500 kg wasn't very much for a bomber in 1916, 1917. The Giant could even carry 2000 kg of bombs. Hell, not one big massive bomb! That would be unpractical anyway. But Norodna Odbrana has the final say.The comment about a 500 kg bomb was a mistake from my side, I missed the important ''of''. But if a war starts, the avionics would be as advanced as they were in 1914, which means handgrenades and bricks dropped from a small mono- or biplane circling above.

Indeed, after doing some more research, I found that the first bombers were actually seaplanes. The planes were loaded on a ship, launched a couple of miles from the shore and attacked, returned to the ships and sailed back home. I was probably to...progressive. But still, it's it still only a mental plan if you know what I mean. It only exists in the head of certain generals and other officers. And if a Jet/Turbine Engine is possible (eventhough as "sort of" variant existed) why not a bomber/ground attack plane?

ps. I changed the load the "bomber" could carry.

And if a Jet/Turbine Engine is possible (eventhough as "sort of" variant existed) why not a bomber/ground attack plane?
I assume you mean that wonderweapon of France?

I assume you mean that wonderweapon of France?

Nah, the Henry Coanda thing. The French wunderwaffen wasn't a good example :)

Nah, the Henry Coanda thing. The French wunderwaffen wasn't a good example :)
That project wasn't entirely successful, to say the least. First they need to come up with a way build a plane out of a light metal to avoid the wings burning up because of the Coanda effect. This was introduced IRL during the 30's, so after a major war involving a lot of air combat would be a good time to introduce it in the rpg. Thankfully no such war has ever happened, and thus the project would be stalled.

That project wasn't entirely successful, to say the least. First they need to come up with a way build a plane out of a light metal to avoid the wings burning up because of the Coanda effect. This was introduced IRL during the 30's, so after a major war involving a lot of air combat would be a good time to introduce it in the rpg. Thankfully no such war has ever happened, and thus the project would be stalled.Actually, Roumania and I have been kicking Coanda's thermojet around, and we now agree that it should be possible before 1920. But realise that this is not your grandfather's jet - that puppy was a turbojet.

The thermojet should be viewed as essentially a prop job with an afterburner. It will be more powerful that a straight prop, but it will also be a gas guzzler, climb poorly, stall easily, be a miserable performer at altitude, and have a somewhat different set of aerodynamic characteristic than a prop job. Will it be better? In some ways yes, in some ways no. Faster, probably - but less maneuverable; OTOH, it will power dive and tree-top like nobody's business. I think biplanes and prop monoplanes will be better dogfighters, but that's a judgement call.

IOW, the thermojet will not unbalance play; it will be an alternative line of aviation history that should be fun to explore. Personally, I expect to see lots of 20's and 30's vintage thermojets, but prop jobs should still predominate and may even be the best of breed w/re to military aviation untilo the turbine comes along in 1940 or so.

Plus the thermojet has some interesting spinoffs; again, nothing unbalancing, but some unique stuff, which will make for a fun game. Once I capture my first thermojet, I've got some cool upgrades in store for it.

Once proven, it will be easy to copy. But until Bogie uses it, I'm going to declare a moratorium on copying.

Voxio, what about the alliance proposal I offered you as France and the meeting in Rome you proposed? Do you plan to go with it or not?

Wow. How much activity on this thread. *yawn*

That's instead of a bump (or Billy, use my pitcher, for Narodna). :)

Voxio, what about the alliance proposal I offered you as France and the meeting in Rome you proposed? Do you plan to go with it or not?
Oh, I didn't notice you had replied to that In character. I'll type something up later.

Hmmm. Mighty quiet here.

Where is everybody?

Hmmm. Mighty quiet here.

Where is everybody?

I can't really start any Sino-Japanese War until the whole Ballkan Wars finishes. I do not want to get AoI (here) confused between 2 timelines, the Balkans of 1912 - 1914, and the "actual" timeline of 1916-something.

Once the Balkan Wars finishes, then I'm sure we can have loads of fun with World War 1 (should the Second Sino-Japanese war lead to that). :)

I've been afraid to post because I don't know what to do with the French situation. So I'm delaying my decision for a couple days...but don't worry I'm going to represent this in character.

~~~

I just noticed that my name is Voxia on the first page, can that be changed to Voxio? It may be helpful...I know I've used that list a couple times to get the names of players.

People, we need somebody to take over Russia! Lenin is dead, Trotsky is dead too, the only thing that can stop Russia from becoming a superpower is the lack of a player.

Don't lose this chance. Join while you still can. Your country needs you!

People, we need somebody to take over Russia! Lenin is dead, Trotsky is dead too, the only thing that can stop Russia from becoming a superpower is the lack of a player.

Don't lose this chance. Join while you still can. Your country needs you!
If nobody joins I'll be happy to RP Russia. NO seems to like the idea [He suggested it].

If nobody joins I'll be happy to RP Russia. NO seems to like the idea [He suggested it].

I'd say give it another week. If no chooses to RP Russia then, you can take over Russia (until someone claims it, of course).

Hey i would just like to point out that Australia was no longer a member of the British empire at this point- It's Federation was in 1901. where Im going with this is im wondering if i can play as Aussie as this was approximatly the time where they wanted to prove themselves to the world. The only problem is im not sure if id be able to get the nescassary info about the army etc. if someone could help me with that plz??...

I’ve been over this with Bogie vis-à-vis Roumania, but here goes…

All of the major European Powers had mobilization plans that required two weeks to implement (Russia’s actually required 4-6 weeks, but a fraction of the Russian Army could begin action within 15-16 days of the issuance of a general mobilization order).

What some nations (like Germany, Russia, and the Dual Monarchy) did was to stage some of their troops to forward positions so as to allow limited military operations against a single enemy in one theatre. For example, elements of the k.u.k. 5.Armee and 6.Armee were set to begin the invasion of Serbia on August 12th, the 13th day of the Dual Monarchy’s mobilization – even though Chief of Staff Conrad told Franz Josef I a few weeks earlier that the entire mobilization would not be ready for 16 days.

Likewise, Russia got its 1st and 2nd Armies moving towards East Prussia in just 12 days (or so) – although they had to march up from positions well behind the border, so they didn’t reach the German frontier until almost three weeks into Russia’s mobilization schedule. In the South, four field armies got moving into Galicia before the third week of their 4-6 week mobilization schedule. The price of this was that the next few armies took up to two months (or more) to ready themselves for combat, all of the ready arms and transport having been used to get the first 6 armies ready ahead of schedule.

Germany did the best job of getting itself moving in the least amount of time. Just 3 days after General Mobilisation began, it had a small force of 12 cavalry regiments and 6 infantry brigades moving into Belgium to invest Liege. This “Army of the Meuse” was reinforced over the next 10-12 days until it reached 100,000 men. Nonetheless, the main German force was not ready to move until around the 13-14 of August (M+12 or M+13), and the entire army wasn’t really ready for action before M+14 or M+15.

Which brings me to an important point: all nations had “covering forces” – mostly comprised of cavalry and a smattering of light infantry – usually in the form of independent brigades – with the barest amount of artillery support. German’s Big Bertha’s – even though they were rail-mobile – didn’t show up for the Battle of Liege until M+9 to M+10 or so. Thus, in 1914, various local actions unfolded between the armies’ “advance guards” – or the aforementioned covering forces – with escalating reinforcement as the main bodies arrived from the rear. But the armies themselves were simply not set up to conduct major mobile operations in less than two weeks, and that was pretty much true everywhere.

Smaller, more compact nations might mobilise faster, and there were of course exceptions. The speed with which the Balkan states mobilised for the First Balkan War is astonishing – but I have to wonder if this was done with little regard for organization or supply. Thus, the Bulgarians were able to mobilise in 1912 in a matter of days because divisions were deployed locally, and all reservists assigned to the local division. This made for huge divisions (some of 24 battalions) which were less flexible in battle and (worse_ were basically combined arms organizations rather than specialised line units (producing an additional degree of inflexibility), but at least these units were easier to deploy. The same is true of the Serbs (and I would guess the Roumanians and Greeks as well, although I haven’t looked at them as closely).

The larger national armies, OTOH, would never be able to duplicate such efforts. So the basic rule should be two weeks to mobilise, with a limited amount of troops available for raids or to spearhead a major assault on a single front to achieve a limited objective.

Hey i would just like to point out that Australia was no longer a member of the British empire at this point- It's Federation was in 1901. where Im going with this is im wondering if i can play as Aussie as this was approximatly the time where they wanted to prove themselves to the world. The only problem is im not sure if id be able to get the nescassary info about the army etc. if someone could help me with that plz??...I think we already have an Aussie...

<looks>

Hmmm. I can't see anyone. Maybe somebody claimed and then deleted his claim. Anyway, it looks clean to me, so...

It's yours, mate!

Post to the factbook (look at the links at the front of the thread), check the Historical Cliff Notes in the Recruitment Thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9640193#post9640193), and you'll be good to go. Since you're still part of the Commonwealth, I would expect you to stand by the U.K. come H_ll or high water - unless you RP some event that causes a break (like a Socialist revolution in Oz - remotely possible in 1912-15, I suppose).

Beyond that, skim the OOC and RP threads. There's a lot, so just try to get the basics. In your area, America (currently proxied by me, until we get a player) is a tad more aggressive, China is a lot more developed, Japan is ready to begin his expansion, and is already allied with a militaristic Siam.

You might want to contact the Dutch Player (Kreynoria[?] if he's still active) and negotiate strategy for the defence of the Dutch East Indies.

I stand corrected.

I stand corrected.Not totally corrected - look at the bit on early operations...

Aight ill start a new post in the recruitment thread to announce australia's late(by 10 years) Federation. like i said the problem ill have will be getting specks on the army and things. its hard to find this timezone and aussie army before the war...

p.s.
Hey narodna if u got msn can u add EmperorsChampion666@hotmail.com i'd like to talk about this

OOC: One third of my army is already mobilised in north-eastern France with general Petain. We need to establish the date. I believe it's the summer of 1912, since RL used the Balkan Wars as a pretext for positioning his troops close to my border, but an exact date would be better. In real life, the answer to my telegrams should come in 24 hours, so, until I get a reply from all of them, I'll freese my moves. I expect Germany to do the same.BTW, the commander of the French Army in 1912 was Marshal Joseph Jacques Césaire Joffre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joffre). The German commander was Colonel General Helmuth von Moltke "the Younger" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_Johann_Ludwig_von_Moltke).

I agree that the action should be assumed to be happening in 1912. Absent the German statement that forces were massing in the Saar Basin in preparation for action in the Balkans, I would have said 1914-15. But Bogie’s right: this links the two wars together, though not quite as von Bismarck would have predicted (“Some damned thing in the Balkans” ).

Kreynoria’s declaration of support for the Grand Alliance means that the Netherlands will mobilise when France mobilizes, but unless France attacks Germany, Belgium, or Luxembourg, I am going to rule that the Netherlands will remain neutral. In the event that the Dutch are attacked, their army will be attached to that of the Germans.

On another note, because the Dual Monarchy ordered mobilization for separate reasons on July 16th, 1912, we will be fully ready for war on August 1st, 1912. Roumania, Serbia, Greece, and Bulgaria (or such as remains of their army) are the only other fully mobilized nations; the Porte is considered to be on a heightened state of alert.

Bogie has raised the question: What will Russia do? Since there is no Russian player, this is something that needs to be decided.

However…

Both France and Germany (and indeed, any other nation that is beginning mobilization at this moment) must decide their basic deployment now, before Russia’s decision gets made. That is because of the rigidity of the mobilization process: until it is completed, a nations war plans may not be altered.

OTOH, I can begin redeploying troops from their “Plan S” positions starting August 1st. This means that we need to set the exact date of the German mobilization and the French counter-mobilisation. I think this date would likely be a week or so after July 27th, the last dated post in the Balkans. This would mean August 3rd or 4th. Does anybody object to this?

Aight ill start a new post in the recruitment thread to announce australia's late(by 10 years) Federation. like i said the problem ill have will be getting specks on the army and things. its hard to find this timezone and aussie army before the war...You may start the Federation retroactive to 1901 and simply assume the last 11 years or so followed history. In fact, that would be the best way to do it.

Hmmn ok but with one difference... The aborigionals of Australia were completely disgarded from the White Australia Policy (in other words they get treated like they wite) this still has the effect of pissing off asia but.

Hmmn ok but with one difference... The aborigionals of Australia were completely disgarded from the White Australia Policy (in other words they get treated like they wite) this still has the effect of pissing off asia but.Fix it in the 40's. In 1912, everyone expects Europeans to be racist. I'm proxying the U.S., whose racially policies under Wilson were obscene.

Here you go, mate.

http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/australian_navy.htm

http://www.worldwar1.com/sfanzac.htm
http://www.worldwar1.com/sfanzac.htm#aif
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/0-ww1-cat-index.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/00-1st-aif-index.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/artillery.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/afc/0-afc-cat-index.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/loc-troops.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/supports.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/supports2.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/1aif/troop_transports.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-nz/0-cat-index-nz_forces.htm
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww1/mena.htm

Obviously, this tells you what Australia could have ready through four years of war (which is actually more useful than an initial OOB).

I know that in real life, Petain was not yet commander of the army. However, his defensive strategy was best in my oppinion. Also, given France's relative isolation, I think its leaders might also be inclined to pursue a more defensive strategy than it really was the case in WWI. Be sure that, in case of a war, I'm not going to launch my men in suicidal attacks against the enemy lines.

August 3rd or 4th is all right, but keep in mind Petain was ordered to begin his military exercises the day the German armies entered Saarbrucken (we should also establish when was that). I'm curious what will Germany do about Belgium. Will they invade it? I think not, since Karlsruhe, Saarbrücken and Stuttgart are close to the French border, but this will make an offensive more difficult for Germany. Btw, is Belgium part of your alliance or not?

Regarding my deployment: 2/3 of the army in Alsace and Lorraine; most of the rest in the Alpes, waiting for Italy's reply; what remains on the Belgian and Spanish borders.

I know that in real life, Petain was not yet commander of the army. However, his defensive strategy was best in my oppinion. Also, given France's relative isolation, I think its leaders might also be inclined to pursue a more defensive strategy than it really was the case in WWI. Be sure that, in case of a war, I'm not going to launch my men in suicidal attacks against the enemy lines.I didn't mean to suggest that you had to attack the Germans because Joffre was your Chief of Staff. I would agree that without allies, France would be a lot more cautious. But remember that the entire French Army has pretty much been trained for attack, so in defending your country, you would probably be more successful trying to set your enemies up to be (successfully) counterattacked whenever possible. If you stay on defense, your foes will be justified in assuming much poorer performance on the part of your troops than you maybe expect (due to such things as, for example, the lack of trenching tools).

On the other hand, you have a lot of unique technology that no one else has. You have an air force (although it is not equipped or trained for air-to-air combat); Germany should not (Italy has one, though, and Spain is forming one) and many of the best aeroplane designs in the world. You have the best light artillery (those deadly Schneider 75mm QF pieces); you have the worlds only non-prototype automatic rifle (the Chauchat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat) [a miserable weapon, but one the French considered acceptable]). Your infantry rifle stinks, but not so badly that it can't be used. You have tear gas grenades (in fact, unlike most armies, you've got a good supply of grenades to start the war).

So to use your strengths, you should at least fight somewhat IC.August 3rd or 4th is all right, but keep in mind Petain was ordered to begin his military exercises the day the German armies entered Saarbrucken (we should also establish when was that).That's what I'm assuming happens on August 3rd or 4th (i.e., both armies begin to mobilize). You'll both be at full readiness by the 17th or 18th (this should be Germany's choice)Btw, is Belgium part of your alliance or not?I was under the impression that it was.

You need to deploy your fleet as well. The historical deployment (which put most everything in the Mediterranean) assumed that Britain would be your ally and secure the channel for you, but you can't count on that here - and the German Navy is bigger than yours. AFAIK, your major naval bases are Toulon and Cherbourg (and maybe Brest), so you should split things between the two (or three) ports before anybody declares their intentions (but active duty fleet units should be able to move immediately - just keep steaming speeds (12-16kts) and distances in mind).

I have naval OOB's for France, BTW - but if your Google "French Navy OOB Toulon 1914" and "French Navy OOB Cherbourg 1914" you should find what you need.

Thank you for the advice. I'll leave you now until tomorrow. I hope to find at least some replies waiting for me. By.

Edit: I'll search for a naval and army OOB tomorrow morning (tonight for you). Then I'll also announce the deployment of my navy. As a preliminary plan, I'll probably divide it fifty-fifty between the Channel and the Mediteranean.

In 1914 the German Army consisted of 25 corps (700 000 men). 12 of them will be sent to the western front, while five stand guard in Poland. Any army units abroad will be told to secure the borders.
As I have already stated in an IC post, the Imperial Navy are deployed in Wilhelmshaven and Bremerhaven.

In 1914 the German Army consisted of 25 corps (700 000 men). 12 of them will be sent to the western front, while five stand guard in Poland. Any army units abroad will be told to secure the borders.
As I have already stated in an IC post, the Imperial Navy are deployed in Wilhelmshaven and Bremerhaven.What about your first line reserves (16 corps) and territorials (4 corps, I think)?

You also have something like 11 cavalry divisions, I think...

<looking for the German OOB>

(Actually, there were 26 corps - one from each of the 24 recruiting districts, one recruited at-large, and the Imperial Guard.)

http://www.users.hunterlink.net.au/~maampo/militaer/milindex.html

This (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWgermanA.htm) says it was 25 corps, for a total of 700 000 men.

The reserves will be deployed in an 3:1 ratio, with 12 on the western front and 4 in Poland.

The territorials are deployed abroad I think, and will be used to secure the borders.

Heh, so Japan isn't the one to start the war. Japan will watch the situation first, but will certainly make good use of the situation...

BTW, it is really important to my strategy. Is it 1915 or is it 1912? If it's 1915 Sharina and I could/should start our Second Sino-Japanese war. If it's 1912...Japan wouldn't be as ready back then as it is in 1915.

Heh, so Japan isn't the one to start the war. Japan will watch the situation first, but will certainly make good use of the situation...

BTW, it is really important to my strategy. Is it 1915 or is it 1912? If it's 1915 Sharina and I could/should start our Second Sino-Japanese war. If it's 1912...Japan wouldn't be as ready back then as it is in 1915.

I'm still waiting for an answer to this for the past couple of RL weeks. So far, all I know that once the whole Balkans War thing finishes, then we can jump to 1915 or 1916 or 1917, whichever's better.

I also thought we can jump to 1915-17 after the Balkan Wars finish, but RL used the war as a pretetext for massing his armies close to the French border, so the current conflict is still in 1912. Maybe we'll be able to finish it rapidly and then, finally, to move on to the real time.

I found an interesting site, with info about the navies of most countries involved in WW1: Turkey, Japan, Russia, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Germany, France, Britain. Here it is:

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm

I guess the most interesting part for us is Fleet Deplyments // Fleet Lists, which is about halfway down the page.

So, it's 1912. I have a serious problem then. I've always thought we were living in the year 1915, with the Balkan affair taking place in 1912. After that would be finished, a sort of "sprint" would be made to catch up with all kinds of things like new tech or tactics developed. This means that as we we're in 1914/1915 a long time ago, the main RP thread has actually been freezed for 1/2 months.

The entire Japanese force has been build up in 5 years, which is realistic. If we're in 1912, I would have to cut my numbers, or say that I've mobilized and trained 600000 men and that my navy has greatly expanded. In two years!

My proposal: if Russia helps France, Germany demobilises and the conflict is over. If Russia remains neutral, I accept Germany's demands. What do you say?

My proposal: if Russia helps France, Germany demobilises and the conflict is over. If Russia remains neutral, I accept Germany's demands. What do you say?

Boring :)

My proposal: if Russia helps France, Germany demobilises and the conflict is over. If Russia remains neutral, I accept Germany's demands. What do you say?
No.

Very well, it looks like I'm outvoted. But this means we'll remain in 1912 for quite a while.

Very well, it looks like I'm outvoted. But this means we'll remain in 1912 for quite a while.

(sigh)

At this rate, we'll be lucky to start the Sino-Japanese War II by X-mas or later. :(

On Russian mobilisation: the last Russia player - Blackledge - sent 3rd Army to Odessa in hopes of marching through Roumanian territory and attacking Albania. Moving it back to Galicia during a general mobilisation of the rest of Russia'a army will be difficult (he also massed against Turkey [he was planning to stage a Zionist revolt] and in the Far East, but we'll ignore those moves).

When Roumania annexed (or attempted to annex) Bulgaria and Greece opposed, I mobilised. I expected that as soon as a deal was worked out between Greece and Roumania, the latter would invade Serbia. I also have expected a strike at the badly outnumbered Greek army, with the objective of winning Salonika as a Mediterranean port for the growing Roumanian empire. Consequently, I mobilised on July 16th, with completion on August 1st.

The crisis in the west started shortly after that, but I hadn't demobilised my armies yet. Consequently, I start with a fully mobilised army; Russia starts with one that is utterly unprepared for war.

If Russia mobilises, it will be taken as an act of war. Russia knows this, and knows that this means I can overrun an undefended Poland before he can foght back. In this state, he has little hope of winning a short war - and if Serbia supports him, he knows the Serbs will lose (I have three armies set up on their border).

Under the circumstances, Russia must ask itself: is the defence of France worth losing Serbia and Poland - and that's before Russia can even begin fighting?

The military realities of the situation imply that Russia will stand down. Diplomatically, I will be gentle and sugar-coat the bitter pill as much as possible. But realistically, he can't win: I basically have the drop on him.

My proposal: if Russia helps France, Germany demobilises and the conflict is over. If Russia remains neutral, I accept Germany's demands. What do you say?
No.Qualify that "no"... ;)

I believe you're telling Bogie that you won't back down if Russia backs him up. But are you also saying that you'll go ahead and fight even if he gives you Alsace and Lorraine?

'Cause that's what it sounds like, but that's not what I think you meant to say.

Qualify that "no"... ;)

I believe you're telling Bogie that you won't back down if Russia backs him up. But are you also saying that you'll go ahead and fight even if he gives you Alsace and Lorraine?

'Cause that's what it sounds like, but that's not what I think you meant to say.
Of course I didn't mean that! Do I look like someone trying to forge an empire?

(I take no responsibility for my seld-distance and humour at this time of the hour)

On a more serious note, I meant that I will not back down just because Russia tries to mobilize. I will however avoid any armed actions against France, if the French government surrenders Alsace-Lorraince and whatever areas claimed by other nations that have suffered because of French aggressions, such as italy and Portugal.

Of course I didn't mean that! Do I look like someone trying to forge an empire?

(I take no responsibility for my seld-distance and humour at this time of the hour)

On a more serious note, I meant that I will not back down just because Russia tries to mobilize. I will however avoid any armed actions against France, if the French government surrenders Alsace-Lorraince and whatever areas claimed by other nations that have suffered because of French aggressions, such as italy and Portugal.That's what I thought, so I figured I should make it obvious.

OCC:

So as to aid our ability to accurately RP in the future, I have taken it upon myself to compile a series of maps that could represent our current RP world. If you guys wouldn't mind, could you please just list all major and minor territorial changes that have occured.

Thanks.

PS- I have also noticed that the United States has not been posting often (I'd imagine he would want to immerse himself into the whole mess in Europe). Does anyone know of his whereabouts or his future intentions?

So as to aid our ability to accurately RP in the future, I have taken it upon myself to compile a series of maps that could represent our current RP world. If you guys wouldn't mind, could you please just list all major and minor territorial changes that have occured.Roumania now controls the former Bulgarian provinces of Ruse and Varna (see this map (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/bulgaria_rel94.jpg); this is somewhat more than they actually got in the real Balkan Wars).

See what you did? Bad boy, bad!

The rest of Bulgaria's borders can be taken from this 1910 map of Europe (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/ward_1912/europe_1910.jpg).

Albania's borders are still being worked out. The Greek-Albanian border will be set in December, 1912. The Serbian-Albanian and Montenegrin-Albanian borders will be set in June, 1913. The Bulgarian-Albanian border will probably be set at a date TBD sometime in 1913.

If you take a close look at this map (http://www.euratlas.com/big/big1900.htm), you can see the political subdivisions of Europe. This can help when people steal a province from somebody else.

Greece now has the former Turkish vilayet (province) of Salonika (squint and you can see it, along with Ruse and Varna). The four vilayets west of that are Albania (and disputed territory).

Greece also won Crete and what the map above calls “the Vilayet of the Islands” (Rhodes and the Dodecanese).

On this map (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/ward_1912/africa_1910.jpg), the part marked as “Tripoli” now belongs to Italy.

Cuba belongs to the U.S.

I believe that's the extent of it (my return of my corner of Tianjin to China is to small to show up on any map).

I have also noticed that the United States has not been posting often (I'd imagine he would want to immerse himself into the whole mess in Europe). Does anyone know of his whereabouts or his future intentions?The Atlantean islands quit. I have been running the U.S. by proxy. They're watching world events...

Any changes in Asia, Africa, or the Americas?

Any changes in Asia, Africa, or the Americas?Reread my post above; it's been edited.

Again, the fate of the world is in my hands. Everything is proceeding as Der Führer has foreseen...

IC post coming up.

Now where am I going to find a war, NO?!<sigh>

This is the gratitude I get! You know, Hitler was furious at Mussolini for “meddling” at Munich, too.

You German dictators are all the same... ;)

Alright guys, here's the first version of AoI RP Maps:

Europe (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=europe9zx.png)
Africa (http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/228/africa7ez.png)
Asia (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=asia7qi.png)
North America (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=northamerica4sp.png)

Please post any comments you may have and I will edit as soon as possible.

* More to come

Is there any particular reason you wrote the European map in French and the others in English?

I really can't understand why I always have to decide the fate of Europe...

I really can't understand why I always have to decide the fate of Europe...Karma. ;)

No, it's who you are. Germany sat in the very heart of Europe with the best rail system, the biggest economy, the biggest army, the second biggest navy, etc., etc., etc. In theory America was stronger, but its isolation meant that practically, German was the most powerful nation in the world (apologies to the Brits, but that's the way it was).

The 800-lb. gorilla gets to decide a lot of things.

Karma.
It's punishing me for being a materialist.

get the juices flowing!
That was so horrible to read I'll need therapy just to look at picture of Teddy again.

Karma can bite you in the ass sometimes.

That was so horrible to read I'll need therapy just to look at picture of Teddy again.I thought I did a good job sending up Teddy! ;)

I've got a couple more heirs to go...

Interesting rp you have. Could you list what nations are still free? I'm not entirely new to NS. I played like a year ago, then I quit and my nation died. Then one day I got bored and I decided to create a new nation.

Look at the Recruitment Thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=441531&page=1&pp=15).

Another recruitment thread - with links to most of our other threads - can be found here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=445024).

Alright guys, here's the first version of AoI RP Maps:

Europe (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=europe9zx.png)
Africa (http://www.saburchill.com/history/chapters/empires/images/0090.jpg)
Asia (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=asia7qi.png)
North America (http://img231.imageshack.us/my.php?image=northamerica4sp.png)

Please post any comments you may have and I will edit as soon as possible.

* More to come

That little white spot in morocco was Spanish controled.

That little white spot in morocco was Spanish controled.
No it wasn't. Morroco was divided between France (most of it) and Spain (a little) after 1910 (1911 or 1912, I don't remember exactly). Since neither you, nor Defuniak posted anything about annexing Morroco, it's still independent.

it was mine on the old map...

Age of Imperialism European Timeline (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446741)

Second Sino-Japanese War (RP Thread) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9715173#post9715173)
Second Sino-Japanese War (OOC Thread) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446784)

I created these so that we can avoid tedious back and forth discussions on how best to start this war, since the Chinese and Japanese players have been waiting a long time for us to cathc up (which doesn't look like it will happen anytime soon).

it was mine on the old map...
France showed a strong interest in Morocco as early as 1830. Recognition
by the United Kingdom in 1904 of France's "sphere of influence" in Morocco
provoked a German reaction; the "crisis" of 1905-6 was resolved at the
Algeciras Conference (1906), which formalized France's "special position" and
entrusted policing of Morocco jointly to France and Spain. A second
"Moroccan crisis" provoked by Berlin, increased European Great Power
tensions, but the Treaty of Fez (signed on March 30, 1912) made Morocco a
protectorate of France. By the same treaty, Spain assumed the role of
protecting power over the northern and southern (Saharan) zones on
November 27 that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Morocco

I would like the claim the USA as the nation which I control. If thats ok with everyone.

... A second "Moroccan crisis" provoked by Berlin, increased European
Great Power tensions, but the Treaty of Fez (signed on March 30, 1912)
made Morocco a protectorate of France. By the same treaty, Spain assumed
the role of protecting power over the northern and southern (Saharan)
zones on November 27 that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MoroccoBut that second treaty hasn't happened yet, has it? That means that technically the "conquest" of Morocco isn't finished.

I always wondered by Defuniak wanted to conquer chunks of Europe when he hadn't finished disgesting North Africa...

I would like the claim the USA as the nation which I control. If thats ok with everyone.

Alright, US you are. And don't be afraid of Japan ;)

But that second treaty hasn't happened yet, has it? That means that technically the "conquest" of Morocco isn't finished.
Exactly. That was my point. Morroco is in the French sphere of influence, but is still an independent kingdom.

Age of Imperialism European Timeline (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446741)

OCC: Great timeline. However, there is one little detail you forgot to add pertianing to Sweden on page 35 of the RP thread (Probably overlooked it in the midst of France's attempted invasions):



STOCKHOLM--- Sweden's Finance Minister Johaanes Kruger on Monday opened a four-day meeting of the government's Economic Advisory Board to draw up drastic economic reforms.

The reform package will be unveiled by King Wilhelm I next month, Finance Ministry officials said. During the meeting, inputs from various Economists and Financial Advisors help add finishing touches to the final economic reform package, which includes the Privatization of all Government owned indutries, Disbandment of Government price regulations, the adoption of a Private-Public Partnership program in the areas of Welfare and Healthcare, A new tax system and the adoption of a Gold based currency.

"These reforms are truly what Sweden needs." claims Hans Blitzer, leader of the United Swedish Business Group in a speech to supporters in Parliment. "For years we have been brooding in economic inactivity, while our competitors in England and Germany push ahead. Now with these new reforms, hopefully Sweden can begin to catch up."

Most Economists and Financial Advisors from around Sweden have also reinforced the new package, claiming that it will "make Sweden a more habital business climate for foriegn and domestic investors alike."

However, Liberal activists again have protested Government changes, claim that they have "ruined the economic stability of Sweden" and that citizens will be forced into poverty. Yet due to the astounding political victory of the Swedish Centrist Party in last weeks elections, Liberals have been unable to stop Wilhelm and his supporters in the Riksdag and public polls are showing that the once Liberal controlled populace is veering towards the center and right.

In other news, Swedish Bonds showed a slight downturn as...

I'd imagine this reform would have taken effect shortly after the elections for the new Riksdag (April, 1912), but the exact date of the passing of this reform is currently unconfirmed.

By the way, I'll have the Africa map updated as soon as possible. And since no one really had any objections to the other maps, I'm guessing that they are accurate enough.

OCC: Great timeline. However, there is one little detail you forgot to add pertianing to Sweden on page 35 of the RP thread (Probably overlooked it in the midst of France's attempted invasions):



I'd imagine this reform would have taken effect shortly after the elections for the new Riksdag (April, 1912), but the exact date of the passing of this reform is currently unconfirmed.

By the way, I'll have the Africa map updated as soon as possible. And since no one really had any objections to the other maps, I'm guessing that they are accurate enough.Thank you. I've been focussing on military and diplomatic events, although if we can get through this era, these other things will become a greater feature of my RP (for example, I'm about to create a “federal” crime lab in Vienna – important for a nation that intends to create a pro-business climate).

Karaska I claim Russia

Ok, well I really want to get the Arabian OCC and RP threads started before (if) we have a WWI. So can you give me the link. :headbang:

Karaska I claim Russia

Go ahead. I trust that you have read NO's cliff notes thread. It has a quite extensive compedium of Russian Events thus far.

Karaska, you're Russia. Remeber to make a factbook etc. Have fun!

I formally give up all claim to the United States. It is now open for others to claim.

Ok, sad to see you go.

I would like to sign up as France


This is shortpoett for all those from E7

I would like to sign up as France


This is shortpoett for all those from E7
I feel that I must warn you that France is on the verge of war with several nations including and especially my own Italy. So I'm not sure if you want to play as them.

If you're interetsed, by all means, go for it.

Until I find out who's the player controlling France, I'll refrain from posting anything more.

Until I find out who's the player controlling France, I'll refrain from posting anything more.
You still going to controll Abyssinia or will this war stop for the time?

You still going to controll Abyssinia or will this war stop for the time?
I have made Abyssinia a minor ally of France. As long as we don't know France's choices in its foreign policy, we also don't know which will Abyssinia's actions be.

For example, if the new player chooses to comply with your demands, Abyssinia will be left alone against Italy and - maybe - Britain. In that case, Abyssinia may decide to retreat from your teritory. But if the present conflict continues, you won't be able to send large forces to East Africa, so Abyssinia stands a chance.

That's why it's impossible to continue unless we know for sure who's in change of France. I'm ready to step down, but if Vietnamexico refuses, I'd like to be given control of France till the end of this conflict. It's quite frustrating to be eliminated in the middle of the action.

I have made Abyssinia a minor ally of France. As long as we don't know France's choices in its foreign policy, we also don't know which will Abyssinia's actions be.

For example, if the new player chooses to comply with your demands, Abyssinia will be left alone against Italy and - maybe - Britain. In that case, Abyssinia may decide to retreat from your teritory. But if the present conflict continues, you won't be able to send large forces to East Africa, so Abyssinia stands a chance.

That's why it's impossible to continue unless we know for sure who's in change of France. I'm ready to step down, but if Vietnamexico refuses, I'd like to be given control of France till the end of this conflict. It's quite frustrating to be eliminated in the middle of the action.
Yea, good point. And it's a little frutraiting for me as wellc onsidering i just got to go to war and suddenly I'm getting to do very little.

I would like to sign up as France


This is shortpoett for all those from E7

As Voxio said, France is being attacked on all sides. It has trouble with Spain over Morocco, Italy in East Africa and with me, Japan, in the Far East. One wrong move and Germany may fall on France as well. You could do it, but I guarantee you it won't be an easy job.

Guys check the Sino-Japanese RP thread. Bogmihia, could you please react as France? Pleeeeeeeease? :D

So...do I keep up with the war or is it just at a standstill until somebody takes over for France? Should we assume that for now the Abyssinian forces have been halted partway through Somaliland while combating the small number of Italian soldiers while the Italians wait for reinforcements.

Or do I keep rping this war?

Either way it seems I have the advantage.

So...do I keep up with the war or is it just at a standstill until somebody takes over for France? Should we assume that for now the Abyssinian forces have been halted partway through Somaliland while combating the small number of Italian soldiers while the Italians wait for reinforcements.

Or do I keep rping this war?

Either way it seems I have the advantage.I say start it. You can of course TG Vietnamexico to see what he's doing, but starting the fight can get the first few moves going, which would certainly keep people interested (we've got folks teetering on the edge of dropping out, as you know).

Pull the trigger, Frank. ;)

Bogie, I don't see any problem with you making the first few moves as Abyssinia. I still intend to get a thread going on the Second Italo-Abyssinian War, and there is a minimum amount of action that will happen down there regardless of what Vietnamexico may or may not do. I’m pretty sure that there will be fighting in East Africa either way.

Also, I would recommend that Bogie TG Vietnamexico as well, if only to brief him on the situation.

Can I join as the Confederate States of America? It would only be the original 11 states plus Kentucky and Oklahoma(the indians there were Confederates).

Can I join as the Confederate States of America? It would only be the original 11 states plus Kentucky and Oklahoma(the indians there were Confederates).No, I'm going to disallow that (unless overruled by the other mods). The game began with a United States, and the next President (Wilson) will be a Southern Democrat born in Virginia (one of whose most important childhood memories is that of seeing Jefferson Davis hauled away in irons).

Besides, why would anyone want just the Confederacy when they could have the entire U.S.? I mean, the country's been run by you d_mn_d Southerners for the last 25 years anyway! ;)

- Signed, Narodna Odbrana (a Former Republican from the Great State of Michigan, home of the U.S. 7th Cavalry [whipped by the Souix, but beat the Confederates soundly at Gettysburg] and the last Yankee President of the United States, Gerald R. Ford)

P.S. Besides, if I did give you the Confederates, I would just have to come down there and kick your _sses again. :D (I’m the Dual Monarchy of Austria and Hungary in the game, but I’m also currently proxying the United States). I'd do it just for the sheer fun of it, and never mind the fact that I'd pick up all that “awyl” in the process.

P.P.S. Seriously, what is with you people?!? The last guy wanted to transform the United States into a medieval Japanese nation, complete with sword-wielding samurai (as if one Japan were not enough!). The most powerful nation in the whole world, and all people can think about is either to give up its ridiculously huge industrial might or bust it up into little pieces. Maybe I'll just keep the U.S. as a fallback in case the country I actually have gets broken up itself (which, as we all know, actually happened and which I am desperately trying to prevent).

If you guys still need a Mexico I'd like that position.

If you guys still need a Mexico I'd like that position.Our Mexican player is hanging on by a thread. Why don't you TG Thrashia and see if he’s going to hang tight or drop (he’s threatened to drop out twice in the last month or so, largely because he wants a faster-paced game [more fighting, less diplomacy and internal development]). If Thrashia wants to stay, there are several other countries that I could recommend; but if he wants to quit, have him post here and the Second Mexican Empire is yours.

But if you do take it, contact me and I’ll brief you on what’s happening (check your TG’s for my MSN handle).

It seems like everybody wants me RP. A few questions for Voxio, then. Why do you say you have the upper hand? You have 10 000 soldiers against 100 000 (who are not armed only with spears, really). On a battlefield, you'd surely lose.

So, let's presume two days have passed after the beginning of the war. The Abyssinian troops have altready occupied French Somaliland and Eritrea and are moving through Somaliland. I have a few questions for you:

1) Have you been able to evacuate all your soldiers from Eritrea in only two days? If yes, how. I have already posted why I doubt you could do it.

2) Where are your troops in Somaliland (coastal cities, enclaves on the continent), because my moves depend on that.

3) Do you have any kind of defenses?

Why do you say you have the upper hand? You have 10 000 soldiers against 100 000 (who are not armed only with spears, really). On a battlefield, you'd surely lose.Modern weapons do not a modern army make. However you slice it, the Abyssinian army is a tribal horde, and a disciplined European army should be able to kick its _ss.

Even an Italian one - or one of mine.

Ok guys, going off on a three day field-trip to Germany! You know what happens every oktober in Germany?

OKTOBERFEST!!!

Ok, officially we're going to study the Roman History of Germany :rolleyes:

Modern weapons do not a modern army make. However you slice it, the Abyssinian army is a tribal horde, and a disciplined European army should be able to kick its _ss.

Even an Italian one - or one of mine.
And yet that tribal horde did manage to defeat a disciplined European army in real life. The Italians only defeated them by using tanks, bombings and poison gas (which, by the way, was against all international conventions at the time). I think I don't have to proove the Italians don't have yet such resources.

And yet that tribal horde did manage to defeat a disciplined European army in real life. The Italians only defeated them by using tanks, bombings and poison gas (which, by the way, was against all international conventions at the time). I think I don't have to proove the Italians don't have yet such resources.
That was 30,000 Italian soldiers trying to invade a country against 100,000 soldiers. A few thousand soldiers entrenched could hold off a large army of poorly trained soldeirs, but not if the smaller army was on the offensive.

Even then the Italians caused more cassualties on the Abyssinians but mainly lost the war due to heavy losses in a single battle. Some 20,000 entrenched soldiers should be able to hold off Abyssnians long enough for Reinforcements. On top of that we left 5,000 rifles to the Parliment in Eritrea to use to fight of Abyssinians. On top of that NO has told me that there were thousands of Askari under Italian command. All in all I'd say there are at least 10,000 soldiers fighting Abyssinians in Eritrea through gurrilia warfare.

That was 30,000 Italian soldiers trying to invade a country against 100,000 soldiers.
And now it's 10 000 versus 100 000 in Italian Somaliland.

A few thousand soldiers entrenched could hold off a large army of poorly trained soldeirs, but not if the smaller army was on the offensive. (...) Some 20,000 entrenched soldiers should be able to hold off Abyssnians long enough for Reinforcements.
I've already asked you about the condition of your defenses, if you remember. Also, you have 10 000 soldiers, you have ordered those in Eritrea to leave for Somaliland, but I doubt you have the ships for doing it and even then, they would need some time to get there.

On top of that we left 5,000 rifles to the Parliment in Eritrea to use to fight of Abyssinians. On top of that NO has told me that there were thousands of Askari under Italian command. All in all I'd say there are at least 10,000 soldiers fighting Abyssinians in Eritrea through gurrilia warfare.
Your original post said: "With the current tension between ourselves and the French I must ask of you to transfer all but 10,000 of the troops under your command in Italian Somaliland as well as all but 10,000 soldiers serving in Eritrea to serve Umberto I."

The Askari are under the governor's command, right? So they were included in your order.

What is that Parliament in Eritrea you keep talking about?

The United States is open? I thought it was taken, and so was going to be a bother(;) ).
I'll be the USA. So, what's up with the game so far? What year is it? What's happened to the Entente powers and Central Powers? Has WWI started? What is the USA's status?

Please tell. Or is there a current events thread for this RPG? If you can't post it here, could you please give me the status via telegram.

I must say, I do love RPGs! :p

The United States is open? I thought it was taken, and so was going to be a bother(;) ).
I'll be the USA. So, what's up with the game so far? What year is it? What's happened to the Entente powers and Central Powers? Has WWI started? What is the USA's status?

Please tell. Or is there a current events thread for this RPG? If you can't post it here, could you please give me the status via telegram.

I must say, I do love RPGs! :pCheck out the History Cliff Notes in the Recruitment thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=441531). Also check out the Age of Imperialism Timeline (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446741). These may not be entirely up to date, but they'll get you close to our current date (August 1912, by my best reckoning).

I'll TG you when time permits. As I have been proxying the U.S. for a while an have a bit of an attachment to it, so I'll coach you for the first few weeks (the U.S. and the Dual Monarchy of Austria and Hungary are unlikely to end up being enemies, although we will probably have a minor falling out over your (soon-to-change) immigration policies.

The Entente and the Central Powers do not exist. There is a Grand Alliance comprised of most of continental Europe, and it is probably going to go to war with France. The U.S. will probably be neutral (and should be, for reasons I'll discuss with you offline). There is a Second Empire of Mexico, and it has a pretty formidable military.

When I TG you, I'll give you my MSN handle, or you can TG yours to me, but right now my time is very limited.

That was 30,000 Italian soldiers trying to invade a country against 100,000 soldiers. A few thousand soldiers entrenched could hold off a large army of poorly trained soldeirs, but not if the smaller army was on the offensive.The Italians made some awful mistakes (interestingly enough, an ill-fated Egyptian punative campaign in 1875 made the same mistakes). I've studied both campaigns, and believe that if those mistakes can be avoided, Abyssinia can be beaten without too much difficulty.

And I think I'll even enjoy it.

I'm still waiting to see whats up with Japan- when Japan invades French Indochina, then I can start RP'ing- but for right now, consider China mobilized (or in the process of doing so) as it had been warned by the K.U.K. about a possible Japanese betrayal.

Your original post said: "With the current tension between ourselves and the French I must ask of you to transfer all but 10,000 of the troops under your command in Italian Somaliland as well as all but 10,000 soldiers serving in Eritrea to serve Umberto I."
That was actually a mistake I made when copy and pasting names...Umberto I was supposed to lead a sepparate group of troops. I fixed it pretty quickly though.


The Askari are under the governor's command, right? So they were included in your order.

Those 10,000 troops did not include the Askari...those are more of a civilian milita to me since they aren't actually Italian citizens.

What is that Parliament in Eritrea you keep talking about?
Italians were a bit advanced in their control of colonies. They allowed them a bit of self-government [until Mussolini took power], and as I recall this was in the form of a parliment that held very little power. They were of course disbanded along with the Italian one.

Short take on the current date: August 12th or 13th, 1912.

No, that doesn't work. See next post.

Here’s my reconstruction of the timeline.

March, 1912 – Italy begins a troop buildup in East Africa
May, 1912 – Ethiopia begins to mass forces to counter the Italian buildup
July, 1912 – Italy has 20,000 men in East Africa (an increase of 12,000-15,000 men); Ethiopia has 200,000 men arrayed against this force.
July 15th, 1912 – The Dual Monarchy begins mobilisation (due to the Balkan crisis).
August 1st, 1912 – The Dual Monarchy completes its mobilisation.
August 3rd, 1912 – Germany begins its mobilisation.
August 4th, 1912 – France begins its mobilisation.
August 5th, 1912 – Italy and Spain (already on alert from the Portuguese crisis of July, 1912) begin mobilisation; the Dual Monarchy and Russia begin intense negotiation. The k.u.k. Kreigsmarine moves to Toranto.
August 7th, 1912 – The Dual Monarchy and Russia arrive at an understanding regarding the crisis.
August 8th, 1912 – The Dual Monarchy presents the proposed Treaty of Vienna. French Prime Minister Raymond Poincaire shot.
August 9th, 1912 – All parties agree to the final draft of the Treaty of Vienna.
August 10th, 1912 – K.u.k. forces pull back from the Russian frontier.
August 12th, 1912 – Spanish forces move to occupy the rest of Morocco. K.u.k. forces begin full withdrawal from Galicia. K.u.k. Kriegsmarine departs Toranto for the Tyrrhenian Sea. Negotiations begin between Roumania, Greece, Serbia, Germany, the Dual Monarchy, and all Bulgarian factions save for the Communists.
August 13th, 1912 – French forces in Algeria placed on alert. Italy begins to withdraw its troops from East Africa. K.u.k. Kriegsmarine puts into Naples.
August 15th, 1912 – France learns of Italian withdrawal from East Africa, notifies Ethiopia, proposes land-for-war swap. As this was already arranged, Ethiopia accepts, and runners are sent to the frontier to alert the tribal hordes; a column of troops is dispatched from Addis Ababa to occupy the French Somali Coast Colony. K.u.k. Kriegsmarine departs Naples for the Tyrrhenian Sea.
August 16th, 1912 – Roumania and Bulgaria reach an agreement.
August 17th, 1912 – Roumania and Serbia begin withdrawal from Bulgaria. Mexico issues an ultimatum to France. K.u.k. fleet dispatches cruiser pickets to observe major French naval bases.
August 18th, 1912 – France begins to offer its colonial territories to its rivals, but in a fashion entirely opposed to their demands. Germany completes its mobilisation. K.u.k. pickets arrive on station and drop anchor.
August 19th, 1912 – Japan issues an ultimatum to France. Germany begins demobilisation in the East. Bavarian troops head for Italy. Serbian forces now out of Bulgaria.
August 20th, 1912 – France proposes sale of Pacific colonies to Japan. French mobilisation completed. Mexican ultimatum expires, but no action is taken.
August 21st, 1912 – France begins the withdrawal of its troops from Alsace and Lorraine. Japan agrees to buy Indochina. First Italian forces from East Africa arrive in Italy.
August 24th, 1912 – French withdrawal from Alsace and Lorraine complete. German troops enter Alsace and Lorraine. Three French divisions sent by rail to the Alps. Four Italian divisions dispatched to Naples and Ostia to take ship for Sardinia
August 25th, 1912 – Bavarian troops arrive in Italy, but are not deployed to the front.
August 26th, 1912 – Ethiopian forces receive orders, await completion of Italian withdrawal from East Africa. First Italian troops begin to arrive on Sardinia.
August 27th, 1912 – Three divisions arrive on Alpine front, three divisions from this front dispatched to Toulon. Roumanians now out of Bulgaria.
August 28th, 1912 – German forces now in occupation of entirety of Alsace and Lorraine. Serbs begin demobilisation; Greeks begin withdrawal from Bulgaria; k.u.k. forces begin withdrawal from Bulgaria, start drawing down forces from Albania and the Serbian and Montenegrin frontiers.
August 29th, 1912 – French divisions begin to arrive at Toulon.
August 30th, 1912 – French fleet leaves Toulon. Two Italian divisions now on Sardinia.
August 31st, 1912 – French fleet drops first division off on Corsica, heads back for Toulon.
September 1st, 1912 – Ethiopian forces enter Djibouti; colony officially transferred to Ethiopian control. French fleet back in Toulon.
September 2nd, 1912 – French fleet begins to ferry second division to Corsica. German western forces begin demobilisation.
September 3rd, 1912 – Second French division dropped off on Corsica. Last of the 10,000 Italian troops to leave East Africa depart. Four Italian divisions now on Sardinia. Greece begins demobilisation.
September 4th, 1912 – French fleet returns to Toulon. All Italian forces now in position.
September 5th, 1912 – Ethiopian armies receive word that Italian withdrawal is complete, begin moving up to the border. French fleet departs Toulon with last division.
September 6th, 1912 – Ethiopians begin invasion of Eritrea and Somalia. French drop off last division on Corsica.
September 7th, 1912 – French leave Djibouti in haste, leaving all gear behind. French fleet assumes position between Corsica and Sardinia. Italy begins mobilising 90,000 men for East African war. K.u.k. dispatches a protected cruiser and two destroyers to the Red Sea.
September 8th, 1912 – Germany sends SS Totenkopf cavalry division to Trieste.

Comments please. I have not added the date for Italy's declaration of war, and several on the dates are certainly very hypothetical.

My only concern with that timeline is that in your timeline, Japan buys French Indochina, which doesn't work well for the proposed Second Sino-Japanese War. For the war to start, Japan needs to invade French Indochina, which alarms China to the fact that Japan may also invade Manchuria, thus China fully mobilizes and declares support for France in Indochina to prevent Japan from acquiring resources that could be used aganist China. Then Japan declares war on China or something, and then we can go from there?

My only concern with that timeline is that in your timeline, Japan buys French Indochina, which doesn't work well for the proposed Second Sino-Japanese War. For the war to start, Japan needs to invade French Indochina, which alarms China to the fact that Japan may also invade Manchuria, thus China fully mobilizes and declares support for France in Indochina to prevent Japan from acquiring resources that could be used aganist China. Then Japan declares war on China or something, and then we can go from there?Look at the Sino-Japanese war thread. The purchase is a done deal, because France did not want to fight Japan (japan was concerned that this would trigger a German invasion).

I wouldn't worry about WE not having an excuse to invade China. Alternately, China could decide that it will not tolerate Japanese occupation of Indochina and invade to keep Tonkin from falling into Japanese hands.

Look at the Sino-Japanese war thread. The purchase is a done deal, because France did not want to fight Japan (japan was concerned that this would trigger a German invasion).

I wouldn't worry about WE not having an excuse to invade China. Alternately, China could decide that it will not tolerate Japanese occupation of Indochina and invade to keep Tonkin from falling into Japanese hands.

ooc.Yeah, don't worry about a slow death of the Second Sino-Japanese war. Japanese troops will be in Bejing before the leaves will fall from the trees... (Ok, the last person who said that went to Holland in exile...:rolleyes: ).

It is now mid-august, the active takeover will take place on the 1st of september. I doubt an offensive can be started immediately from Indochina. Resources will only start to come in after a longer period of time, a couple of months or something. With this (small) diplomatic succes, Japanese HQ is thrilled and ready to jump on China. I will post an IC post tomorrow, I just got back from Germany with a slight hangover...

Also, just to note: Mexico is still in this and so am I. :D Guess whos back, back agian, shady's back. *does a little dance*

Nooooooooo!
*runs*
*returns and talks serious this time*

Glad to see you back!

Also, just to note: Mexico is still in this and so am I. :D Guess whos back, back agian, shady's back. *does a little dance*

*Does a little dance too.*

Now, do what you've been waiting to do.:p

Mwuahahaha! Yes, my time has come!

Can someone get me a link again to the world map?

BTW, the Japanese takeover of Indochina is supposed to happen on September the First.

Can someone get me a link again to the world map?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9705895&postcount=586

Damnit! I won't be able to post anything till friday! My laptop is one piece of junk and I'm trying to get it repaired. With a bit of luck it will be repaired before the time. I'm now writing on a friends computer.

If things begin to heat up at a high pace, could someone TG me regulary with updates? I would really appreciate it. Also if diplomatic stuff would be sent to me via TG I would be thankful.

Sorry about that, NO. What's your take on Mexico's situation with military or starvation?

I haven't payed too much attention to the different countries navies until now, but aren't these numbers a bit inflated? Let's take the Dreadnoughts, for example.

By 1914 the British Navy had nineteen Dreadnoughts (thirteen under
construction), compared with Germany's thirteen (seven under
construction). Other fleets with Dreadnoughts at sea by 1914 were: United
States (8), France (8), Japan (4), Austria-Hungary (2) and Italy (1).
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWdreadnought.htm

I see Italy has 5, although in real life they had only one, Mexico has 5 Dreadnoughts, although they had none and Spain has 10 (!) Dreadnoughts. In that case, if I post a factbook, I'll have to say I have something like 20 Dreadnoughts just to keep the proportions.

OOC: Ok, now I'm angry. Narodna, I didn't come back to this rp just to get my ass handed to me by a guy in the US who thinks I'm his personal enemy.I can’t tell the U.S. player not to take the existence of a strong and independent Mexico as a threat to his existence – or at least his “rightful” dominance of the Western Hemisphere. After all, I have to put up with Balkan nationalists who think they have a right to bust up my country to fulfill their irredentist schemes.And this is getting dangerously close to a god-mod.I agree that we’re verging into godmod territory. If America’s next post involves a full-blown revolution, trust me, I will blow the whistle. It takes a lot more RP to set up a successful guerilla war in someone else’s country. At the same time, the fact that the hacendados were eliminated just a year or two ago means there are still significant social differences in Mexico that a foreign power could exploit if they wanted to. You will need to RP some efforts to both root out the rebels and cut the (political) legs out from under their movement. Maybe you could depict them as pawns of Yankee imperialism… ;)

(However, to keeps things fair, I'm going to give the U.S. a terrific domestic policy headache before the night is over - and one that could spill over into the foreign policy arena.)

New Helgast (whom I will call NH from now on), you need to keep the time scale in mind. You can’t have a Congressman propose a new arms bill one day, have it pass the next day, and be a year away from having a well-prepared army the day after that. Remember that we are in the opening stages of a European war, and the time scale is moving in days or even hours, not weeks and months.

A newly proposed bill can’t make the floor of the House in under a month, or over to the Senate in less than a fortnight; thus, the arms bill can’t get the President’s signature before October (well, actually, not even that fast: 1912 is an election year, and Congress will probably want to go into recess by the end of September so they can take the train back home and run for re-election; that means that they’ll probably hear the bill in committee and agree to bring it up again either in a December “lame duck” session or have the new Congress do it in January). Under the Constitution, BTW, all appropriations bills must start in the House, so that’s where this one has to begin.

I would expect that the speeches and diplomatic exchanges that have occurred thus far would be stretched out across the fall season, which leaves Mexico free to be involved in the current European war if it wants. If the U.S. wishes to fight Mexico on behalf of France, that is of course NH’s prerogative – but he’ll be fighting with what he has.And its plain military and logical sense to mobilize one of my armies and position it in the center of northern mexico; to protect my country from an invasion by your own forces.I’m not going to intervene when one player excoriates another through the use of propaganda. If the U.S. wants to depict Mexico’s response to its assembly of troops in South Texas as an aggressive move, well, you should see some of the nasty things I’ve said about the Roumanians. ;)

Since when does the US government have intelligence on top secret movements of the Mexican Army?Mobilisation is hard to hide.

You started with a 50,000 man regular army. Assuming that you employ the Prussian reserve system and a three year tour of duty, you would have 400,000 men of all kinds (active and reserve). To get to 500,000, you would probably need to discharge half of your men after two years service and keep the other half (specialists - usually cavalry, mountaineers, marines, light infantry or gendarmes, artillerists, and engineers) for three years; you would be inducting 20,000 men a year, or about 26% of all able-bodied men of draft age.

To increase your army (regular or otherwise) by 200,000 men in the minimum practical length of time, you would have to increase the number of men conscripted ever year to 70,000 (93% of all available able-bodied men of draft age), and even then it would take four years to reach your goal (your army would expand by 50,000 men a year). Such moves would be impossible to conceal.

In the first two years of this program, your regular army would increase to 100,000 men. This means that your first move – the shipment of a 200,000 man army overseas (which we now know was to Santander in Spain) would have required the call-up of at least 150,000 men (the first 7½ years of reservists – assuming you follow European practice and draft at age 20, this would mean all trained men born in the years 1890-1883 (the “classes” on 1903-1910), or every trained man under the age of 30. Again, this move would be impossible to conceal.

Now, you want to move an army into Northern Mexico. Assuming you want an army of at least 50,000 men and you don’t wish to strip the rest of the country clean of troops, you would have to mobilize even more men – at least the “class” of 1901, if not 1902 as well. Again, this would be impossible to accomplish without detection.

Finally, keep in mind that military secrecy was not as rigorously enforced or maintained in 1912 as it is today. But by the same token, the nation responding to such events needs to consider the question, “In a day before satellites and ELINT, how long would it take for me to find out about X, assuming that word must travel by messenger or at best telegramme (after reaching a telegraph office, of course)?” And since when does building dreadnoughts cause my nation to starve? You don't use wheat and food to make ships; you use steel.Again, I won’t stop people from lying about each other. ;)

But remember, steel costs money, which you often need to get by selling such things as food. Since Mexico likely doesn’t have the shipyards to build 3 dreadnoughts a year, if must buy these warships from overseas – or build those shipyards, which also requires the expenditure or resources. Nothing is free.

This may or may not mean that your people are starving. Just because the American player believes you are doesn’t make it so, and more than the fact that many of my enemies believe my nation to be on the brink of ethnic insurrection doesn’t make that so, either. But you should consider the question of what Mexico is not buying in order that it might buy arms instead.Also, Agustín was not put in power by any European country. He stepped in with past-loyalists who had been his step-father's men; and basicly took over in a bloodless coup.I don’t believe you ever gave us a history (I provided several possibilities, but I’m not sure which one you chose). It might be a good time to do that now....also, that gold digging is also secretAs long as you don’t spend it, you can keep its extraction secret – at least until the miners start to talk.

Thanks Narodna, I will consider all of that, and when I find the time, come up with a proper history.

Also, just to note for everyones benifit. Mexico currently has a standing army of 500,000 men. No more no less. We have 5, I repeat 5 Dreadnoughts and a small assembledge of lighter smaller ships.

Basicly my military is made up of infantry backed up by elite calvary, and a small corp of artillery. Nothing real special.

I will be making it clearer, given time, on my nations economic dispositions and the reforms that Agustin installed when he came to power. I apoligize for being inprecise and somewhat lazy. I've been busy lately.:(

I haven't payed too much attention to the different countries navies until now, but aren't these numbers a bit inflated? Let's take the Dreadnoughts, for example.Yes, everybody's numbers are inflated. I recommend looking up what your nation actually had in 1914 and then comparing that to any one of a number of excellent web sources that tell you the year these ships were actually commissioned.

I think that people are assuming that they had their 1914 strength in 1900 or 1910 and then adding in what they think they could have built between 1910 and 1915 (if that makes sense).

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm#flt
http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/

Also, just to note for everyones benifit. Mexico currently has a standing army of 500,000 men. No more no less. We have 5, I repeat 5 Dreadnoughts and a small assembledge of lighter smaller ships.

Basicly my military is made up of infantry backed up by elite calvary, and a small corp of artillery. Nothing real special.

I will be making it clearer, given time, on my nations economic dispositions and the reforms that Agustin installed when he came to power. I apoligize for being inprecise and somewhat lazy. I've been busy lately.:(A standing army of 500,000 men, eh?

Are you sure that you want to do that?

On the assumption that you answer yes, I hereby declare all the following things to be true of Mexico and its military:

OOC: Thrashia has cleared this up by restating what he means by “standing army”.

Out of 15,000,000 people, you have (approximately) 75,000 able-bodied men of each ace group. No more, and no less. To have 500,000 men in your standing army, you must be drafting every single able-bodied man of ages of ... oh, let's guess 19 to 25. No exceptions - not even seminary students, university students, nobody. Every single man in Mexico within these age groups gets drafted. Period.

No one marries in Mexico before age 26 - unless they marry before the age of 19, and then they have to leave their wives and children for 7 years military service. 7 whole years.

Other than children, no labourers in Mexico are below the age of 26. Not a single one.

Fertility is depressed in Mexico, because even if we assume the average Mexican girl marries a man 4 years her senior, then no Mexican girl ever has children below the age of 22. Whereas a great many other countries have a generation length of 17-20 years, and can therefore produce a just over 5 generations in 100 years, Mexico can produce only slightly more than 4 generations in 100 years. Moreover, since every Mexican girl has 7 fewer childbearing years (because there are no men to inseminate them), each produces 20-25% fewer children per generation. Mexico's birthrate is therefore 40% lower than everybody else's.

Industrial and agricultural productivity is lower because Mexico's work force is trained for war, not labour, not services, not agriculture, but warfare. Peaceful endeavours are a secondary activity, and one that men learn only after their heads are full of the craft of soldiering. This makes per capita income 10-15% lower and reduces tax revenues.

Mexico has no reserve requirement, no system for keeping track of its veterans, and no way to call them back to the colours in the event of a national emergency.

(You said your army was 500,000 men, all active duty, no more and no less.)

Any bandits, rebels, or revolutionaries who wish to fight against the Mexican government should be treated as trained soldiers, for in fact they all have 7 years of military service under their belts.

As for your 5 dreadnoughts, would you care to tell me where they were built?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As you see, I have no problem hanging people with their own rope.As you see, nothing really specialWith half the population of France - the only nation in the world that drafted almost ever able-bodied man - you have a standing army just as big...

OOC: Thrashia has reduced his dreadnaught count from 5 to 1.

...You also have more dreadnaughts that France or Japan, two of the greatest naval powers in the world. Only the US, Britain, and Germany have more dreadnaughts than Mexico. And this without a shipbuilding industry capable of building such vessels in the first place.

How did you manage to generate that much foreign exchange with 6% of your male population in the military?

I think I was pretty reasonable in my reconstruction of your military - 50,000 regulars, 500,000 reserves, with growth to 650,000 by 1915. But if you're not willing to remain within the bounds of what was feasible in 1912, then I will not hesitate to impose realistic penalties on your country for unrealistic behavior.

Nothing personal on my part, as anyone can tell you. You're not the first country I've smacked down, and you wont be the last.

NO, I'm a little confused. I remember there was some kind of agreement in which Mexico is bigger in this timeline- has New Mexico, Arizona, California or something?

Since you're speaking of me... Look, Thrashia, on this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=433959&page=52) page and read the first post. Now that is hard to swallow. :)

Regarding my actions as France.

I haven't posted anything lately because I'm waiting for a reaction from the guarrantors of the Treaty of Vienna. If their official response will be negative - or if they decline to respond officially - please tell me so. Apparently, many days have already passed since the Italian declaration of war, because I see the Mexican Navy has reached France.

On a nautical map I have, the distance Colon (in Panama) - London is 8740 Km and Colon-Gibraltar 8020 Km. There's no listing of a direct route from Mexico to France, but the distance is about the same. HMS Dreadnought could reach speeds of up to 21 knots, but in your fleet you also have slower ships and - as you certainly know - the speed of a fleet is equal to the speed of its slowest ship. At an average speed of ten knots, the Mexican Navy would cover about 400 Km daily, so they'd reach France three weeks after the Italian declaration of war.

In conclusion: don't conquer my country while I'm waiting for a reply. As NO has said, the action is moving very slowly, so three weeks is a lot. Let's see first what will Germany, The Dual Monarchy and Russia decide to do.

I'm reposting here my message. Maybe you guys haven't seen it, but it was on page 63, the post no. 941, five days ago:

Telegram from France to Vienna, Berlin and Sankt Petersburg

The recent declaration of war by Italy is in obvious violation of the Article VI,
which calls for an arbitration in case the two parties cannot reach an
agreement. Please do your duty, in accordance with this provision of Article
VIII: "Upon any finding that a party has indeed violated this Treaty, it shall
be the duty of both the Grand Alliance and the Guarantors to force
compliance, and to do so by any means necessary."

NO, I'm a little confused. I remember there was some kind of agreement in which Mexico is bigger in this timeline- has New Mexico, Arizona, California or something?No.

The U.S. never agreed to be emasculated in that way. When the game began, in fact, the U.S. Vice President (Aaron Rosen) was described as former Congressman from the State of California.

When we started down this road, I made it very clear that the Second Empire of Mexico could not be created at the expense of the United States. We had been playing almost 2 years (NS time) when Mexico joined the game, and I felt it was unfair to suddenly redefine America (a nation that was in the game at the start) after 2 years of prior interaction.

(Actually, I forced Mexico to agree to two things: he couldn't create his country at America's expense, and he couldn't make his Emperor the biological son of Franz Josef's brother.)

I said that any changes to American history caused by Mexico's creation would have to be approved up front by the U.S. player. I recall no such approved changes or concessions.

I haven't posted anything lately because I'm waiting for a reaction from the guarrantors of the Treaty of Vienna.And I was waiting for a little more action in the Mediterranean.

But I'll post a reaction soon, just to help this move along. In RL we would take our time to discuss it internally.Apparently, many days have already passed since the Italian declaration of war, because I see the Mexican Navy has reached France.No, the Mexicans moved before the Germans mobilised. I can show you the posts... :)On a nautical map I have, the distance Colon (in Panama) - London is 8740 Km and Colon-Gibraltar 8020 Km. There's no listing of a direct route from Mexico to France, but the distance is about the same.I already forced the Mexican player to suffer through this, only in this case (using a distance calculator I found on the web), I forced him to steam at 8 kts. He also stopped somewhere in between, but for now I will leave that location unspecified....so they'd reach France three weeks after the Italian declaration of war.Actually, as of August 1st, he'd been in position for over a week.

No.

The U.S. never agreed to be emasculated in that way. When the game began, in fact, the U.S. Vice President (Aaron Rosen) was described as former Congressman from the State of California.

When we started down this road, I made it very clear that the Second Empire of Mexico could not be created at the expense of the United States. We had been playing almost 2 years (NS time) when Mexico joined the game, and I felt it was unfair to suddenly redefine America (a nation that was in the game at the start) after 2 years of prior interaction.

(Actually, I forced Mexico to agree to two things: he couldn't create his country at America's expense, and he couldn't make his Emperor the biological son of Franz Josef's brother.)

I said that any changes to American history caused by Mexico's creation would have to be approved up front by the U.S. player. I recall no such approved changes or concessions.

Oh. I do recall that Atlantian Islands said something about confirmation or agreement about something with Mexico about "Second Empire".

I apologize if my memory is fuzzy right now- I'm just overwhelmed with all the crap that is going down here at NS, with many veteran RP'ers quitting because of the Hogsweat thing, as well as worrying about a couple of RL issues. This has been quite a hectic and hard week + weekend for me, and the good RP'ers leaving NS just topped it off in "worse-ness". :(

Oh. I do recall that Atlantian Islands’ said something about confirmation or agreement about something with Mexico about "Second Empire".I made Thrashia get Atlantean Islands permission because I believe that, had America wanted to snuff out the Second Empire in 1866, it could have. Thus, what AI agreed to was not to let Mexico have the old Mexican Cession back, but just to let the Second Empire become a part of the game.

I might be using the term 'standing' as an over view, and not in true context. I have two armies, the 1st and 2nd that are 'mobilized' or 'currently operational'. The others amries are more to the liking of a reserve. They've been trained then given leave until called upon. My training program only lasts about 7 months concerning conscripted soldiers. The 'regular' army, men who have made the army their career, make up the 1st and 2nd armies, thus the most veteran and experianced.

I will drop down to 1 dreadnought and just increase my navy by a few smaller lighter vessels. I was under the impression that it wasn't all that hard to build one, but then concerning Mexico's incapability to produce them at this moment, I have only one. Bought from either England or Germany, or some major source.

Bogmihia, if you remember in the past, every now and then you'd see a seemingly random post made by me concerning the moving of troops and ships. That was my 1st army being mobilized and then sent to Northern Spain. I made one post where my soldiers were having a little trouble talking to the populace because the dialect was different. I left small clues as to where these men where headed.


Like I said earlier, I will be spending a little more time later on coming up with a proper agriculture and economic plan for Mexico to present to you guys. And like Bogmihia said, times now-a-days are getting kinda hectic...

Sorry about not understanding the time system, as it was a little hectic.
As for the military appropriations act, in times of percieved emergency, Congress can meet and decide quickly.

I'll try to take things slower.
But I still want the US to be the number one Western Hemisphere nation, so I'm going to continue to build the military.

I might be using the term 'standing' as an over view, and not in true context.Ah. OK, I see where you are coming from now. I thought everyone knew how the Prussian reserve system worked.

Here's the skinny on it.

You pick an age of universal service. America and a few other countries us 18; Europeans use 20. I think Mexico would likely also use 20, but that's your call.

I've done a quick and dirty study (I haven't taken the time to pull out the 1940 standard mortality tables and a spreadsheet and crunch this in detail, but I will at some point down the line), and concluded that 0.5% of any early industrial population consists of able-bodied males of age X. Most nations required 25 years of military service, so at most a nation would have something like 12.5% of its population available for military service. For Mexico in 1912, at 15,000,000 people, this would be 1,875,000 men, divided into 25 classes of 75,000 men each.

But nations seldom took every man who could serve; 50% or less was common. Thus, if Mexico took only 40% of all eligible conscripts, it would induct 30,000 men each year and have a total manpower reserve of 750,000 men.

The standing army consists of those men who are currently serving on active duty. This is equal to the size of the annual draft times the number of years service required of each man. Since many armies required longer service in the technical disciplines, the army might be a little larger when you include those personnel.

Thus, if you induct 30,000 men a year and keep them for three years, you'll have an active duty army of 90,000 men. You can add a few extra men to that total to include officers and technical personnel kept for longer tours of duty.

The reserves are then divided into 3-4 categories; a typical division might be:Active Duty (ages 20-22) - 3 x annual draft
1st Line Reserves (ages 23-26) - 4 x annual draft
2nd Line Reserves (ages 27-33) - 7 x annual draft
1st Line Territorials (ages 34-39) - 6 x annual draft
2nd Line Territorial Reserves (40-44) - 5 x annual draftWhich, with 30,000 annual inductees, would produce this kind of division of manpower:Active Duty - 90,000 men
1st Line Reserves - 120,000 men
2nd Line Reserves - 210,000 men
1st Line Territorials - 180,000 men
2nd Line Territorials - 150,000 menTypically, active duty formations are kept at ¼ strength. When mobilisation occurs, units are usually brought up to full strength by adding the 1st and 2nd Line Reserves. Alternately, you could keep units at ½ strength, using the 1st Line Reserves to flesh out the unit upon call-up; the 2nd Line could then be used to duplicate the first line units with a second set of reserve formations.

1st Line Territorials would then likely be formed into a third line of reserve units, which could then be used to replace casualties among the other units. 2nd Line Territorials would usuall only be used for garrison duty or to secure lines of communications.

Of course, no two nations did it the same way, so feel free to reorganise your reserves however you see fit. Just assume that you have 25 classes of roughly equal size, and decide how you want to use them in war.

(It is entirely acceptable to also create two “separate” armies, one of conscripts and one of volunteers. You could induct 37,500 men each year [50% of all available able-bodied men] and accept 7,500 into the Federales for 7 years service [52,500 men total], while the other 30,000 are trained for 7 months and then discharged into the Regionales. This would give you 60,000 men in active service [through 7 months of the year; you'd have 52,500 the rest of the year] and 855,000 reservists [862,500 through the last 5 months of the year]. Feel free to play with the numbers and set up your own classes and units, now that you know what you have to work with.

Everyone else is assumed to have what they actually had. Ask me if you can't Google your military and find this info for yourselves.)I will drop down to 1 dreadnought and just increase my navy by a few smaller lighter vessels. I was under the impression that it wasn't all that hard to build one, but then concerning Mexico's incapability to produce them at this moment, I have only one. Bought from either England or Germany, or some major source.That's consistent with what Argentina, Brasil, and Chile had. Assume that it was built in 1910, and finished in 1911; assume that you laid down a second one in 1911, to be finished late this year. Assume British construction, since that was the standard for Latin American countries in that era. If you look at the posts I provided, there are links to the lists of ships produced, and you can pick one that looks typical of what you'd have (or just duplicate one of the ones built for Brasil or Argentina).

Sorry to slam you. It's not personal, I'm just trying to keep things on an even keel. My earlier assertions about the Mexican military are no longer valid, and I will gray them out.

Don't worry about it Narodna, I think I needing to be somewhat slammed. My orginizational skills are more dedicted to FT armies, so my experiance with old age armies is somewhat lacking, to put it nicely. And I may have been using a more Napoleonic type organizational system when I made my armies; so its understandable that it would be a little of the chart.

Also, Bogmihia, I'm going to start landing in France...ok? You don't have any problems with that do you? :D

Don't worry about it Narodna, I think I needing to be somewhat slammed. My orginizational skills are more dedicted to FT armies, so my experiance with old age armies is somewhat lacking, to put it nicely. And I may have been using a more Napoleonic type organizational system when I made my armies; so its understandable that it would be a little of the chart.Parts of the Napoleonic system make sense for Mexico - for instance, keeping whole units in your active duty army and sending reserves upon call-up to separate reserve units (both Russia and the Porte [Turkey] use this system, and it's good for large countries with poorly developed transportation systems).

There are other parts of the Napoleonic system of organisation that are worth keeping, but that gets to battlefield organisation and not reserve organisation. Essentially, you can organise your combat units any way you want. Just keep in mind as you build your organisation the fact that all communications must travel by foot, heliograph, or telegraph (mobile radio sets are a few years off), and that too many units will leave you with a shortage of officers (but too few will produce operational inflexibility).

Yes, it is very different from FT. :)

Ok, guys, I got me laptop back. Sofar I haven't seen anything that should be of Japanese interest, only the Mexican proposal. I also see a slightly escalating conflict concerning Mexico and France. About that I would like to say one thing.

NO, you did post something about naval invasions a while back. I remember (which, after some searching seems to be right) that you said that invasions were very difficult during the (RL) WWI era. Most of the times it dealt with capturing a port, secure it as a base and expand from there. A well known campaign which followed another strategy was Gallipolli, and everyone knows the result of Gallipolli.

One of the main factors which resulted in an allied defeat was logistics. Water had to be brought all the way from Egypt, and that was just a beginning. There was a lot of difficulties with bringing food, rations etc ashore, shortly said, they lacked a good port.

And Thrashia, if you really landed in the middle of nowhere... *shrugs* a well, if Boghie follows the French strategy at that time they will attack in in no time.

Offensive à outrance!

BTW, Yesterday and today I went to Verdun, very interesting...

Yea well Gallipoli was an eye sore of rocky terrain. I landed in a small port town less than 60km away from Bordeaux. Big difference there. And Its only the dawn of the second day by now. I have some troops that have gotten to the outskirts of Bordeaux by now, and my army is going to need at least until 2moro to fully unload from their ships at Arcachon.

So, as of right now, I'm not overly worried.

Ok, well pure ooc-ly good luck!:D

BTW, for judging what is realistic and what isn't, I'm using a combination of systems:Phil Barker's excellent miniatures rules, "Horse, Foot, & Guns" (for corps-level battles)
Phil Barker's pre-dreadnought naval warfare rules, "Damn Battleships Again" (for squadron and fleet actions)
Martin Porter's colonial campaign rules, "They Don't Like It Up 'Em" (for general logistical and movement rules)
War Time Journal's "1916" (good for orders of battle and unit organisation)(All of these are available for free on the Web: Google the names and authors.)

I also am using ...Jim Dunnigan's fantastic grand-tactical level boardgame, "1914" (Avalon Hill), and the game that it spawned, "1940: Battle of France" (also Avalon Hill)
Frank Chadwick's "Command Decision" (GDW), which came with a Great War supplement (for division-level battles)
Jim Dunnigan's fleet-level wargame "Jutland" (another Avalon Hill title)

IMPORTANT


Ok, people, new Rule. Other players please give your opinion.

If you claim to RP a nation, check regulary. For a major power (France, Britain, Russia, America, Japan etc.) at least once a day. For smaller powers (Austria-Hungary, China, Netherlands-due to it's enormous colonies) at least once every two days. For the rest, two or three times a week at least. If you have a good excuse for lack of posting, things are different ofcourse. If you can't post so much, though luck. If you claim a large nations, you have certain duties too. Regulary posting is one of them.

I made this proposal because it bothers me a lot that people claim nations, and don't post anymore.

I don't feel particularly guilty of not posting for long periods of time, but I think once per day is too much. A two days break shouldn't be a tragedy, provided the 'guilty party' isn't doing it too often and that when posting all the problems which have appeared are adressed. I agree with checking at least twice a week though, even for the smallest states.

{EDIT: Many days ago I had asked Voxio some questions regarding the actions in Abyssinia. I still haven't received an answer, although he has posted since then. I consider this is worse than not posting for a couple of days. It's OK if he will say 'wait, I'm still researching the subject' or 'wait, let's finish something before', but he hasn't responded at all.}

Speaking of problems...

Narodna Odbrana
I still have objections about the Ethiopian 'minor official', but let's say you could get that information if you bribed him. I really don't see why should he just tell the German diplomat such an important secret during a casual conversation. And his statement would be a circumstantial evidence at best, which the French governement will certainly deny. It's my word against his, to put it that way. You don't have to change your IC post if you agree, just tell me so in this thread.

Thrashia, I'm sorry it took me so long to post my military moves. If you people want me out, I'll just go back to my Romania and let France be devoured by its greedy neighbours.:)

Hey guys, am I still the ottomans in this game? Because since school started I've been really busy with soccer and all. So can I still play again? I don't care what country I am (except america).

If it is possible, may I play as Australia./

You haven't been replaced, TA. You can still be the Ottoman Empire if you want. I prefer it this way to you being Australia, which is quite isolated and doesn't have a great influence in the Balkans.

Welcome back Andromedan! You can RP Australia, we had someone who claimed it, but never RPed with it. You can also return to RPing with the Porte., what do you want?

Woot! I'm finally able to access Jolt again. About a week ago my comp wouldn't load the forums, so I've been unable to post for a while. I'ma read what I missed and post something from that.

{EDIT: Many days ago I had asked Voxio some questions regarding the actions in Abyssinia. I still haven't received an answer, although he has posted since then. I consider this is worse than not posting for a couple of days. It's OK if he will say 'wait, I'm still researching the subject' or 'wait, let's finish something before', but he hasn't responded at all.}
My latest problem aside, I was under the impression that you wanted to hold off on the Abyssinian conflict [I forget why exactly], since I had yet to hear otherwise I waited on posting.

Since it is obvious you want to get back to that I will try to have something posted in there by tomorrow night.

Heh, your not the only one with problems. I can only get on the forums via google. Just type Jolt Forums and Hey Presto!

Woot! I'm finally able to access Jolt again. About a week ago my comp wouldn't load the forums, so I've been unable to post for a while. I'ma read what I missed and post something from that.
I have added the Age of Imperialism thread to my Favorites. From there I can acces the entire forums area. I think it's faster than googling.

My latest problem aside, I was under the impression that you wanted to hold off on the Abyssinian conflict [I forget why exactly], since I had yet to hear otherwise I waited on posting.

Since it is obvious you want to get back to that I will try to have something posted in there by tomorrow night.
I don't want to hold off and I don't necessarily want to solve it in a hurry. I just wanted to have a reaction on that matter. I didn't know you were unable to acces the forum and I presumed - mistakenly - that you were doing it on purpose. Sorry.

Could it be that the players who haven't posted in the last days (such as New Helghast and Relative Liberty) have the same problem as you?

That could be possible.

Narodna Odbrana
I still have objections about the Ethiopian 'minor official', but let's say you could get that information if you bribed him. I really don't see why should he just tell the German diplomat such an important secret during a casual conversation. And his statement would be a circumstantial evidence at best, which the French governement will certainly deny. It's my word against his, to put it that way. You don't have to change your IC post if you agree, just tell me so in this thread.You may assume the fellow is in the pay of the Germans.

German and Turkish agents were extremely active in Ethiopia during the Interregnum. You can look this up using Google; virtually every history of Ethiopia that I have found states this.

Circumstantial evidence? Absolutely. But most intelligence is extracted step by step, and this is just one step.

I'm glad you've backed off the assertion that "only the Royal Family" could know about your deal. At a minimum, the deal would be known to the French Cabinet, Governor Bonhoure (former Governor of Djibouti), Ato Josef (the Ethiopian consul in Djibouti), and the Council of Ministers (which had 12 members). It is possible that Queen Taytu knows, and remotely possible that Duke Mikael knows (although I intend to play it as though he does not). Notice that Prince Iyasu does not know (or at least that's how I'm RP'ing him). Oh, and quite clearly Emperor Menelik doesn't know. He doesn't know much of anything these days...

Beyond that, their immediate households might also know (or certain members of their households). In fact, it is highly unlikely that the Ministers would keep things to themselves. Again, you have to ask yourself: why would anyone in Ethiopia care if France's dirty little secret gets out? It isn't going to make any difference for them at this point, either way.

Again, you have to ask yourself: why would anyone in Ethiopia care if France's dirty little secret gets out? It isn't going to make any difference for them at this point, either way.
They'd lose their only ally. That's a very big reason to keep their mouths shut, considering their only neighbours are the Italians (and we all know how friendly they were to the Ethiopians) and the British, who are the Italians' allies and wouldn't mind getting a piece of Abyssinia.

Ok guys, I'm off for a congress of my Political Party. I probably won't be able to post anything because I'll be way to tired and full of propoganda, so...

BTW, I'm busy with typing a sort of "Radical Political Program" for certain Japanese Guys who aren't happy with Fukuoka.

I have added the Age of Imperialism thread to my Favorites. From there I can acces the entire forums area. I think it's faster than googling.

Well, it works now...but for the past week or so the pages wouldn't load.

I don't want to hold off and I don't necessarily want to solve it in a hurry. I just wanted to have a reaction on that matter. I didn't know you were unable to acces the forum and I presumed - mistakenly - that you were doing it on purpose. Sorry.

I checked back, I was waiting for you to accept the date at which the war was taking place which was why you had asked for us to pause. And it's okay, if we had switched possitions I'd probably think the same thing.

Anyways, I want to post a naval battle, but the only post on your naval forces I have seen was very vague [Something about having them patrol the waters of Corsica], so I'm going to need a bit more information. I don't need every detail, but it'd be helpful in writing out a battle.

Many days ago I had asked Voxio some questions regarding the actions in Abyssinia. I still haven't received an answer, although he has posted since then. I consider this is worse than not posting for a couple of days. It's OK if he will say 'wait, I'm still researching the subject' or 'wait, let's finish something before', but he hasn't responded at all.And I completely approve.

I've had to twist the timeline into a pretzel to accomodate your Ethiopian ploy, and I'm still not happy about it. You assume that Ethiopia "mobilised" its army in response to a threat by Italy that was itself never actually voiced IC, and that this army was poised on the border ready for war. I have all kinds of problems with this: Ethiopia had only one railroad, and it only ran a hundred miles into the country. You can't "mobilise" an army in the European sense without railroads.


In 1895, Ethiopia took two months to mass its armies and five months to move them to the Eritrean frontier. Nothing has changed to make the assembly of the Ethiopian army any faster.


Ethiopia had precisely one telegraph line, leading from Djibouti to Addis Ababa, so communication with its field armies would have had to be by runner.


The Ethiopian rainy season begins in July and doesn't break until September. During this time, most Ethiopian rivers go into flood stage. Some of these rivers rise as much as 15' and become impassable, raging torrents; one rises 60' and becomes several miles wide. Some of these rivers lie between Addis Ababa and Eritrea.


In spite of all the above, somehow, France - responding to an Italian ultimatum issued in August - negotiated a deal with a fictitious "Ras Iyasu" (the real Ethiopian representative in Djibouti was Ato [Ethiopian for "Mister"] Josef), who accepted the deal on the spot on behalf of a nearly comatose Emperor lying on his deathbed without a Regent and with a teenage heir. Less than twelve days later, the war is over and all of Italy's East African colonies are overrun.Yeah, right. It is not believable that anyone representing Ethiopia in Djibouti could decide to send his country to war without consulting with the government in Addis Ababa.


It is not believable that the Council of Ministers could have reached a decision to go to war without a great deal of debate and Byzantine internal politicking involving important persons far beyond the Council itself, all of which would have taken days (if not weeks).


It is impossible for the decision to go to war could have been conveyed to the armies on the frontier in less than a fortnight, given that the frontiers are 500-600 miles away, across terrain that is alternately mountainous and flooded.


It is not believable that the Ethiopian army could have massed by August without having started in January. What happened in January to prompt them to do so?


Given the condition of key frontier rivers, it is impossible for the Ethiopian army to have begun its invasion before early September in the north and late September in the south (the southern monsoons end a few weeks after the northern ones).


Bogie adds further than the Ethiopian invasion begins "a few days" after the last Italian troopship leaves for home. It is not believable for the Ethiopians to have gotten word, even at their forward camp near Adowa, that the Italians had finished their withdrawal from Eritrea. In the south, it is not believable that they could have gotten word in less that a month from the withdrawal of that last troopship. If the Italians began withdrawing only after the crisis broke in Europe, they would not have finished leaving (due to transport limitations) for 3-4 weeks, so the earliest the invasion could have begun would have been October, 1912.


Even if somehow the invasion could have been started within a few days of the Italian ultimatum, as was France's intention (which is impossible), Bogie has hopelessly misjudged the difficulty of the terrain before the Ethiopian army. Only a very small portion of Italy's Eritrean colonies occupies a "very narrow strip of land no more than 63km from the sea" (as Bogie claims). The northwestern portion of Eritrea runs hundreds of miles inland, and even the relatively short route from Adowa to Asmara to Massawa is 100 miles. Worse, this route runs over a steep mountain range, and both towns are fortified. Further east, along the Eritrean "panhandle", the Ethiopian side of the border is the Danakil depression, a blistering desert that lies hundreds of feet below sea level, sees temperatures of over 120° on a regular basis, and is volcanically active. It has been described as Hell on Earth. Marching an army through this region could easily kill over half the men so dispatched.

As for Somalia, it is over 200 miles deep in most places. All but the southwestern portion is guarded in the west by the Ogaden, a desert region that would be hard going for large armies. The southwestern region is (barely) accessible through a savannah region that would not be passable to a large army until after the rainy season was over in late September. As for Somalia itself, it is basically a desert with very poor forage, again excepting the southwestern corner of the country. Not very passable ground for tribal armies on foot, especially large ones. To expect the Ethiopians to have massed half of their army (100,000 men) along this frontier is absurd. The only reasonable invasion route in or out of Ethiopia is through Eritrea.


Finally, the withdrawal of regular Italian forces would still leave native askaris and other gendarmerie present in each territory. I have yet to determine the number of such troops in Somalia, but there appear to have been between 4,500 and 7,000 such men in Eritrea. In addition, Massawa was surrounded by a ring of forts designed to provide a perimeter for defence until assistance can arrive from Italy. Combined with the fact that an army of 100,000 men (plus cattle and camp followers) would strip the land bare in a matter of days (I'm estimating 100,000 camp followers and 36,000 head of cattle, plus about 20,000 pack animals), supply would be a questionable matter, causing the army to range far and wide in search of food, thus slowing its advance still further.I think the Italian player is entirely justified in demanding a resolution of affairs in the Western Mediterranean long before anything happens in East Africa.

(BTW, it is unlikely that France had more than 5,000 men in Djibouti, including askaris. That likely means that the number of European soldiers evacuated would be in the low hundreds, and the number of weapons handed over to the Ethiopians therefore insignificant.)

They'd lose their only ally. That's a very big reason to keep their mouths shut, considering their only neighbours are the Italians (and we all know how friendly they were to the Ethiopians) and the British, who are the Italians' allies and wouldn't mind getting a piece of Abyssinia.But you're not their ally!

To use the old Mission Impossible phrase, you've disavowed all knowledge of their activities, and if you were now to support them, that would be a clear violation of Article V of the Treaty of Vienna.

Beyond that, you gave up the Somali Coast Colony, so you no longer have an entrepot for arms (the only thing you can possibly send that could help them). And that's assuming you could ever get those arms to them in the first place, seeing as how you'd have to take them around the Cape of Good Hope.

It's pretty clear to them that they're on their own. In fact, an open war with the rest of Europe might be the only way for them to get you actually acknowledge them as an ally...

I don't have the time right now, but I hope to answer your posts later today.

O.K. I didn't want to argue and present my side of the story, because I honestly don't have the time. That's why I had accepted that you can get the info from somebody in Abyssinia. Your last two posts (IC and OOC), however, require an answer.

Firstly, Lij Iyasu is 25, not 15, at least according to wikipedia. I agree, it's not always 100% accurate, but that's the source I used when I first invented the Ras Iyasu charachter.

Secondly, the ranks:

- Ras is the highest noble rank, sometimes borne by minor princes of the Solomonic blood. One had to be elevated to the the rank of negus by Imperial decree, but ras was usually hereditary. (The word's origin is Indo European, hence the Indians' raj, the Egyptians' ra, the Romans' rex.)

- Bitwoded (abbreviated Bit.) Literally "beloved" by the king, the highest non-royal title ranks after ras in precedence.

- Dejazmach (abbreviated Dej.) is a high title which follows bitwoded in precedence. It originally referred to a "gate keeper." In more recent times, it was also a military title.

- Fitawrari (abbreviated Fit.) is a noble title and was formerly a military one, meaning "leader of the vanguard." This title ranked after dejazmach.

- Gerazmach (abbreviated Geraz.) ranked after fitawrari and is translated literally "military commander of the left." This is one of the lower aristocratic titles but also one of the older ones.

- Kenyazmach (abbreviated Kenyaz.) is equivalent in rank to gerazmach, to which it may be considered complementary. It means "military commander of the right."

- Balambaras is a lower title of nobility of ancient origin, literally "castellan" or commander of a fortress. Similar in some respects to dejazmach but considered a lesser title.

- Ato. Traditionally 'sir' for a gentleman. Now "Mister."

- Woizero (abbreviated Woiz.) Traditionally an aristocratic lady, now Mrs.

- Lij. Literally "child," this is a title reserved to the children of the titled nobility.

Iyasu is the 'Lij' (child) of Ras Mikael. If his father dies, he becomes (surprise, surprise) Ras Iyasu. He's the guy in contact with the French consul in Somaliland. Why the hell is he collaborating with the French and not with the Germans and the Turks, as in real life? Because of the Italian threat, of course (which, by the way, took place IC; just check the post no. 750 - the last on page 50). Thrashia is not the only one who can make posts with an echo weeks later, you know.

Before moving on to the military details, I want to clarify the Ras Iyasu character. He was considered pro-Muslim because he had several 'wives' (which I consider only promisquity) and entered mosques. On the other hand, he also entered a Roman Catholic church, so that's not a good criterium. After becoming Emperor, his position might become weakend because of this and also because of his 'populist' tendencies of making nobles out of commoners, but for the moment he's not view negatively. This campaign, if succesfull, could also increase his popularity and his subsequent hold on power.

Right now, Iyasu is the heir apparent attempting to get a better position through war. On the Abyssinian side, the only people who have to know about the deal are Iyasu (of course), the regent Ras Tessema Nadew and - maybe - the war minister, Fitawrari Hapte Giorgis Denagde. The others don't have to be told about it. They only know that the Italians have left their colonies almost unguarded and it's better to strike now than to wait for them to attack when they'll be better prepared.

Geography, now. You quoted me saying that Eritrea occupies a "very narrow strip of land no more than 63km from the sea". That's totally incorect. I don't know what should I begin with. Firstly, I was talking about Italian Somaliland, not about Eritrea. Secondly, my units were miles (more exactly, leagues transformed into miles), not Kilometres. Thirdly, I wasn't talking out of thin air, I was quoting a site which said the reason for the second Italo-Abyssinian war was the interpretation of the border between Abyssinia and Italian Somalilans, which stipulated that the border is 21 leagues inland. The Italians claimed it was nautical leagues, while the Abyssinians replied it's foolish to measure distances on land using nautical leagues (a view I share). Anyway, the discution about Eritrea is pointless, because Voxio said he's retreating from that colony into Somaliland in the post no. 912.

One last comment about Somalia: it's southern part is wider now because it received a portion of Kenia after WW1 (the Italians were pissed they got so little in the peice treaties after the war). You can see the difference if you compare a pre-WW1 map with a modern one.

Now, the military matters.

Ethiopia had only one railroad, and it only ran a hundred miles into the country. You can't "mobilise" an army in the European sense without railroads.
Railroads are not essential. How many railroads have Serbia or Greece? One and none. Abyssinia is much larger, but this shows railroads are not absolutelly essential.
In 1895, Ethiopia took two months to mass its armies and five months to move them to the Eritrean frontier. Nothing has changed to make the assembly of the Ethiopian army any faster.
I haven't stumbled upon this piece of information until now. I can accept it took two months to mobilize (although this means the mobilization would be over just in time for this conflict:) ), but I can't believe they couldn't move any faster to Eritrea. Menelek must have had military reasons for the slow movement of his army.
Ethiopia had precisely one telegraph line, leading from Djibouti to Addis Ababa, so communication with its field armies would have had to be by runner.
Rider, actually. They had horses.
The Ethiopian rainy season begins in July and doesn't break until September. During this time, most Ethiopian rivers go into flood stage. Some of these rivers rise as much as 15' and become impassable, raging torrents; one rises 60' and becomes several miles wide. Some of these rivers lie between Addis Ababa and Eritrea.
Irrelevant. Voxio evacuated Eritrea. Even so, they're not on the border, so they can't be used as a means of defense.
In spite of all the above, somehow, France - responding to an Italian ultimatum issued in August - negotiated a deal with a fictitious "Ras Iyasu" (the real Ethiopian representative in Djibouti was Ato [Ethiopian for "Mister"] Josef), who accepted the deal on the spot on behalf of a nearly comatose Emperor lying on his deathbed without a Regent and with a teenage heir. Less than twelve days later, the war is over and all of Italy's East African colonies are overrun.
Not exactly a military problem, but I've decided to answer your issues one by one.

As I have shown, Ras Iyasu is not fictional. Also the heir (Iyasu himself) is not a teenager from what I know. The deal was negociated with a mature heir apparent. Btw, the Regent existed. He was Ras Tessema Nadew, as I've shown above. All Iyasu had to do was to get his ass into a train going to Addis Ababa and talk with the regent. His most difficult task would have been to persuade the regent to accept his plan, but honestly, can you refuse the heir apparent when you know the current monarch is on his deathbed?
It is not believable that anyone representing Ethiopia in Djibouti could decide to send his country to war without consulting with the government in Addis Ababa.
Problem adressed.
It is not believable that the Council of Ministers could have reached a decision to go to war without a great deal of debate and Byzantine internal politicking involving important persons far beyond the Council itself, all of which would have taken days (if not weeks).
That's a better objection. However, Italy had already threatened Abyssinia, so the ministers (even not knowing about the French weapons) wouldn't hesitate for too long.
It is impossible for the decision to go to war could have been conveyed to the armies on the frontier in less than a fortnight, given that the frontiers are 500-600 miles away, across terrain that is alternately mountainous and flooded.
A fortnight is one week, right? Anyway, if you read my post, you'll see the proposal was made before the Italians had finished retreating from their colonies. "Are they by any chance related to the Italians withdrawing their troops from Eritrea and the Italian Somaliland?" 'Withdrawing' implies an action in progress. This means the Abyssinians can still time their attack to occur 'a few days':) after the Italians' withdrawl.
It is not believable that the Ethiopian army could have massed by August without having started in January. What happened in January to prompt them to do so?
I'll need proof it was impossible to move to the frontiers in less than 5 months.
Given the condition of key frontier rivers, it is impossible for the Ethiopian army to have begun its invasion before early September in the north and late September in the south (the southern monsoons end a few weeks after the northern ones).
Actually, most of the rivers are perpendicular to the frontiers. At least that's my impression looking on a map.
Bogie adds further than the Ethiopian invasion begins "a few days" after the last Italian troopship leaves for home. It is not believable for the Ethiopians to have gotten word, even at their forward camp near Adowa, that the Italians had finished their withdrawal from Eritrea. In the south, it is not believable that they could have gotten word in less that a month from the withdrawal of that last troopship. If the Italians began withdrawing only after the crisis broke in Europe, they would not have finished leaving (due to transport limitations) for 3-4 weeks, so the earliest the invasion could have begun would have been October, 1912.
According to your timeline, 23 days pass between the Italians beginning the evacuation and the Abyssinian invasion (August 13 and September 6, respectively). The first part of your statement ('a few days' etc) is adressed above.
Even if somehow the invasion could have been started within a few days of the Italian ultimatum, as was France's intention (which is impossible), Bogie has hopelessly misjudged the difficulty of the terrain before the Ethiopian army. Only a very small portion of Italy's Eritrean colonies occupies a "very narrow strip of land no more than 63km from the sea" (as Bogie claims). The northwestern portion of Eritrea runs hundreds of miles inland, and even the relatively short route from Adowa to Asmara to Massawa is 100 miles. Worse, this route runs over a steep mountain range, and both towns are fortified. Further east, along the Eritrean "panhandle", the Ethiopian side of the border is the Danakil depression, a blistering desert that lies hundreds of feet below sea level, sees temperatures of over 120° on a regular basis, and is volcanically active. It has been described as Hell on Earth. Marching an army through this region could easily kill over half the men so dispatched.
I have already talked about this.
As for Somalia, it is over 200 miles deep in most places
Nowadays, yes. But I still remember quoting the source saying the border was fixed initially 21 leagues inland.
All but the southwestern portion is guarded in the west by the Ogaden, a desert region that would be hard going for large armies. The southwestern region is (barely) accessible through a savannah region that would not be passable to a large army until after the rainy season was over in late September. As for Somalia itself, it is basically a desert with very poor forage, again excepting the southwestern corner of the country. Not very passable ground for tribal armies on foot, especially large ones. To expect the Ethiopians to have massed half of their army (100,000 men) along this frontier is absurd. The only reasonable invasion route in or out of Ethiopia is through Eritrea.
Somalia is a very dry place, I agree, and I was aware of it. But I didn't post the deployment of the Abyssinian troops, waiting to see where are Voxio's troops. My intention was to have several units located along the border, each striking one particular concentration of Italian soldiers. This way, the supply problems (water, actually) can be avoided if a rapid movement is achieved. Anyway, the main force aimed against Mogadishu would travel along the river Uebi Seebeli.
Finally, the withdrawal of regular Italian forces would still leave native askaris and other gendarmerie present in each territory. I have yet to determine the number of such troops in Somalia, but there appear to have been between 4,500 and 7,000 such men in Eritrea. In addition, Massawa was surrounded by a ring of forts designed to provide a perimeter for defence until assistance can arrive from Italy. Combined with the fact that an army of 100,000 men (plus cattle and camp followers) would strip the land bare in a matter of days (I'm estimating 100,000 camp followers and 36,000 head of cattle, plus about 20,000 pack animals), supply would be a questionable matter, causing the army to range far and wide in search of food, thus slowing its advance still further.
"What?! Those damn Abbyssinians! e pulled away from their borders as a show of good faith and they attack us?! " Roared Michel Luchasi, Italian East African Governor.
"We'll have to retreat to Somaliland, our forces can regroup there and try to hold them off at the seaports."
Hasn't he retreated to Somaliland? In 1896, the Abyssinians managed to supply their soldiers so well that they didn't have to use their ration of dry meat and cereals. This feat can now be repeated.

Why should there be so many camp followers?
I think the Italian player is entirely justified in demanding a resolution of affairs in the Western Mediterranean long before anything happens in East Africa.
I don't want to seem obstructionist, but I think the war is taking place in September.
(BTW, it is unlikely that France had more than 5,000 men in Djibouti, including askaris. That likely means that the number of European soldiers evacuated would be in the low hundreds, and the number of weapons handed over to the Ethiopians therefore insignificant.)
We ask France for military instructors, cannons, machine-guns and all the support they might spare for the defeat of the Italian scum.
That's the Abyssinians' request (early summer 1912, let's say, since it's more than 15 pages back and the entire thread has under 70 pages). I made a proposal to Italy not to help the Africans in exchange for an alliance or a NAP. They refused. In consequence, all the requested material might very well have been brough there (before August, when France joined the Grand Alliance).

----------------------------------------

That's the longest post I ever made. I'm exhausted.:) And all might be in vain if you can proove me one of two things: that Iyasu is actually 15; or that it really takes 5 months to get to the borders of Abyssinia. if either of these is true, then the war didn't even start and will not start.

Anyways, I want to post a naval battle, but the only post on your naval forces I have seen was very vague [Something about having them patrol the waters of Corsica], so I'm going to need a bit more information.
I have to eat now, but I'll respond in an hour or so. I also hope to offer Thrashia a naval battle really soon.:)

EDIT: According to this (http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/) site, France has:
On the outbreak of the First World War France had 19 battleships, 32
cruisers, 86 destroyers, 34 submarines and 115 torpedo boats
and
Other fleets with Dreadnoughts at sea by 1914 were: United States
(8), France (8), Japan (4), Austria-Hungary (2) and Italy (1).
From one Dreadnought in real life, now you have five. The trend maintains for the other ships, too. Should I also increase my navy proportionally, since France wouldn't have allowed such an evolution to take place without taking measures? I still don't know. It's also worth wondering how long does it take to build a dreadnought. For example, from the same site we find out that:
The Hood was considered Britain's greatest battlecruiser. Her
construction was begun in 1916 and she was completed in August 1918.
That's two whole years for one ship. In this case, we must also wonder if there was enough time for Italy to build five Dreadnoughts until 1912.

Anyway, half of my navy is in the Mediteranean and half in the Atlantic, regardless of its size.

But you're not their ally!

To use the old Mission Impossible phrase, you've disavowed all knowledge of their activities, and if you were now to support them, that would be a clear violation of Article V of the Treaty of Vienna.
Yes, now. But what about the future? If France doesn't get a good deal with Italy, who knows what could happen...

Beyond that, you gave up the Somali Coast Colony, so you no longer have an entrepot for arms (the only thing you can possibly send that could help them). And that's assuming you could ever get those arms to them in the first place, seeing as how you'd have to take them around the Cape of Good Hope.
I'll remind you the terms of surrender:
How would you like buying the French Somaliland, monsieur Iyasu? Of course, you would allow us free use of all your ports and a small military garrison, but the colony would be turned to your administration. Most importantly, you would no longer be landlocked.

It's pretty clear to them that they're on their own. In fact, an open war with the rest of Europe might be the only way for them to get you actually acknowledge them as an ally...
If they betray the secret and get France into trouble, France will consider they are not a reliable ally and that they bring more trouble than advantages.

As for the naval numbers thing, a lot of countries (including me) had started building programs. I had * Dreadnoughs if I follow my building program. I know it's doubled of the realistic number in 1914, but in that scenario the Japanese didn't counted on starting a war within 5 years.

BTW, anyone knows what Sharina's up too?

As for the naval numbers thing, a lot of countries (including me) had started building programs. I had * Dreadnoughs if I follow my building program. I know it's doubled of the realistic number in 1914, but in that scenario the Japanese didn't counted on starting a war within 5 years.
But Voxio has five times the Dreadnoughts Italy had in real life and we're not even in 1914, it's just 1912.

BTW, anyone knows what Sharina's up too?
I've just wired a TG to her. Hopefully she'll answer.

EDIT: I think "* Dreadnoughts" means "8 Dreadnoughts".

I thought Sharina was a him? Well anyway, doesn't matter. And the 8 Dreadnoughts is my 1915 navy BTW. But still, if Italy has 5 Dreadnoughts, it means it has build four more, in two years...

Yeah, you're right :p

I thought Sharina was a him?
It's the name's fault.:p Btw, just for the record, I'm also a he. I joined the thread with this girl-sounding name and after that I didn't want to create confusions, so I kept it. He (I got it right this time :)) replied a few minutes ago he's waiting for you to invade Indochina or China, "to allow me to post counter-moves and such". Just send him a message you've started the invasion and he'll reply.

[QUOTE=Bogmihia]
On the outbreak of the First World War France had 19 battleships, 32
cruisers, 86 destroyers, 34 submarines and 115 torpedo boats

a sight i have says

Dreadnaught: 1
Pre-Dreadnaught Battleships: 29
Coast Defence Ships: 4
Armored Cruisers: 23
Protected Cruisers: 17
Destroyers: 79
Torpedo Boat: 20
Submarine: 62
Total: 234

in 1912, not sure it makes much a difference

Other fleets with Dreadnoughts at sea by 1914 were: United States
(8), France (8), Japan (4), Austria-Hungary (2) and Italy (1).

in 1914 Spain had three Dreadnaughts, bad ones yes but still Dreads

Other fleets with Dreadnoughts at sea by 1914 were: United States
(8), France (8), Japan (4), Austria-Hungary (2) and Italy (1).
I doubt it was one for Italy unless they could build an additional 4 Dreads within' a year. By 1915 Italy had 5 Dreadnaughts. [Acording to a website posted by NO a while bacl] Plus I've begun production of several Dreadnaughts. [To go into active duty in mid 1913]

If you don't remember I tried to play as Russia before(and messed it up bad).
Can I rejoin as Canada? I'm serious. Maybe I can get some experience playing as a small country.

OOC: canada :( i was hoping for the next person to be Portugal...

If you don't remember I tried to play as Russia before(and messed it up bad).
Can I rejoin as Canada? I'm serious. Maybe I can get some experience playing as a small country.
Welcome back!

--------------

I think there's a conspiracy against me. I make an alliance with Russia and the Russian player retreats. Now I made an alliance with the US and New Helghast hasn't posted anything for five days. :(

EDIT: Could Voxio and Nebarri Prime post their sources, please? What they say contradicts my information.

Welcome back!

--------------

I think there's a conspiracy against me. I make an alliance with Russia and the Russian player retreats. Now I made an alliance with the US and New Helghast hasn't posted anything for five days. :(

EDIT: Could Voxio and Nebarri Prime post their sources, please? What they say contradicts my information.
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/F/firstworldwar/comba_turkey.html

BTW, Because I've been preparing for a game of D&D that I will be running soon I forgot to finish up my RP, so I doubt it will be up tonight.

I've reached a conclusion regarding the size of my navy. In the attempt of keeping a semblance of reality, I'll slightly increase all my ships by just a 1/4. This means:

10 Dreadnoughts (5 in the Mediteranean, 5 in the Atlantic)

24 Battleships (12 in the M, 12 in the A)

40 Cruisers (20 in the M, 20 in the A)

107 Destroyers (54 in the M, 53 in the A)

43 Submarines (22 in the M, 21 in the A)

144 Torpedo Boats (72 in the M, 72 in the A)

Your comments, please.

http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/F/firstworldwar/comba_turkey.html

BTW, Because I've been preparing for a game of D&D that I will be running soon I forgot to finish up my RP, so I doubt it will be up tonight.
Very well. I see.

The following are my rulings (as a mod) or comments on the action thus far:

On the French MilitiaThere wasn’t any.The total service rendered by the individual soldier is thus twenty-five years. He is registered at the age of twenty, is called to the colors on the 1st of October of the next year, discharged to the active army reserve on the 3oth of September of the second year thereafter, to the Territorial Army at the same date thirteen complete years after his incorporation, and finally discharged from the reserve of the Territorial Army on the twenty-fifth anniversary of his entry into the active army. On November 1, 1908, then the active army was composed of the classes registered 1906 and 1907, the reserve of the classes 1895-1905, the Territorial Army of those of 1889-1894 and the Territorial Army reserve of those of 1883-1888.The term of service was lengthened to 3 years in 1911 or 1912 (I’m assuming 1912), but this doesn’t change the basic breakdown of reserves. As Bogie has pointed out, virtually every able-bodied man in France has served for 2-3 years, the exception being future civil servants, who usually get out after 1 year.

Consequently, General Mobilisation brings all able-bodied men to the colours; except for invalids and old men over 45, there would simply be nobody left to take a hunting vacation in August or September among the pine barrens of Southwestern France.

The last 12 years of reserves – men aged 34 through 45 – are given over to the Territorial Army.The Territorial Army and its reserve (members of which undergo two short periods of training) are, however, allocated to local service.Which is another way of saying they assemble at their local depots and defend their homes from attack. Not a militia, exactly, but this would be the force that would likely first meet the brunt of any Mexican invasion. Since France mobilised sometime in early August, 1912, these men would be in the field and ready to fight.

How many would there be? That depends on the local population. The full number of persons liable to be called upon for military service and engaged in such service is calculated (1908) as 4,800,000, of whom 1,350,000 of the active army and the younger classes of army reserve would constitute the field armies set on foot at the outbreak of war.Which means that the other 3,450,000 would constitute the second line of reserves and the Territorial Army – those forces that would likely be left behind in the departments to defend the hinterland from attack.

The good news (for Mexico) is that these men would be old(er), (relatively) out of shape, and rusty in their fighting skills; in addition, their weapons would be of older make (approaching obsolence) and ammunition in short supply (not to mention transport); they would basically be static fortress troops.

The bad news (for Mexico) is that there would be a lot of them and they would be defending their homes, which would give them higher (initial) morale and better knowledge of the ground.

So how many men would there me in any given department? With a total French population of 39,252,245 (in 1906), it would seem reasonable to take 8.8% of the local population and assume those men to be assembled at the department seat or at key points around the department. This would imply about 18,000 men in Bordeaux and another 20,000 or so in the surrounding countryside to the south and west; Arcachon would have only been defended by 2-3 companies of Territorials (essentially a short battalion). Many of these men would be set as pickets at key points overlooking the sea or key road junctions, and there would be both roadblocks and patrols, especially so close to the Spanish border.On the Terrain and CommunicationsThe Along the Atlantic coast from the mouth of the Adour to the estuary of the Gironde there stretches a monotonous line of sand dunes bordered by lagoons on the land side, but towards the sea harbourless and unbroken save for the Bay of Arcachon. To the north as far as the rocky point of St Gildas, sheltering the mouth of the Loire, the shore, often occupied by salt marshes (marshes of Poitou and Brittany), is low-lying and hollowed by deep bays sheltered by large islands, those of Olron and Re lying opposite the ports of Rochefort and La Rochelle, while Noirmoutier closes the Bay of Bourgneuf.It would appear that Bogie’s assertion that the area is mostly wooded with sandy or marshy soil seems to be correct (I have other sources that verify this claim as well).

It is also reasonable that the landing near Arcachon resulted in the news being transmitted back to Bordeaux, and indeed throughout the surrounding area – this is, after all, one of the largest ports in the region. Therefore the likelihood of Mexican forces catching the French further inland napping seems quite slim, although the assembly of troops from further inland may take as much as a week or more.On Landing and Movement SpeedsAlthough Thrashia has assumed that his troops land right at Arcachon, this really isn’t possible. Instead, his soldiers would have to land opposite the dune-field running from Pointe d’Archachon south to Biscarrosse-Plage, a strand of about 6-7 miles in length. The dunes here do reach a height of over 100’, and there is a 20’-30’ palisade on the inland side of the dune field (a couple of hundred yards inland) that would have to be demolished, but that would be relatively simple work for combat engineers. From here, it is about 10 miles to the southern outskirts of Arcachon, and another 15 miles or so to the eastern edge of the Bassin d’Archachon.

While this is probably the likeliest beach for miles around to support an invasion, it is still unlikely that it was guarded, so the landing by Thrashia’s Mexicans would have been unopposed. Assuming a tolerable sea state, seagoing vessels could drop anchor just over half a mile offshore; over-the-rail operations would have then meant that the initial wave of Mexican invaders (all light infantry) would have had to row toward shore in longboats; assuming a reasonable number per vessel and a reasonable speed in the water, each vessel brought inshore could have probably discharged about 150-200 men per hour, give or take a few – but no cavalry or heavy equipment.

A realistic landing would therefore see each large transport disgorge a full battalion in 5-6 hours (which, assuming that the landing started just after midnight, would leave these battalions ready to advance from the beach by 7:00-8:00 AM; the second wave of soldiers would be ashore by shortly after noon, and depart the beach by 1:00-2:00 PM). On the flanks, independent companies would have been dispatched to secure Biscarrosse-Plage along the southern edge of the landing zone, and could have easily taken it in less than an hour after the landing. Another company probably could have made Biscarrosse proper shortly after dawn, but any deeper advance would have had to come after sunrise.

At the northern end of the landing zone, independent companies probably could have pushed to Pilat-Plage, Pyla Sur Mer, and La Teste-de-Buch (on the outskirts of Archachon) by dawn. Given that Arcachon would probably have at least a couple of companies and possibly as much as a battalion of Territorials in garrison, there would have been a fight for the city, although probably not a stiff one. If the Mexicans could get at least three regiments or demibrigades (10,000-12,000 men) ashore by dawn near the northern end of their landing zone, they could have mounted a fairly serious assault on the town by 9:00-10:00 AM at the latest, and cleared the town by early afternoon.

I will now assume that the 1st Brigade, rolling off the beach before dawn, uses the assault on Arcachon to cover its movement eastward, and slips past La Teste-de-Buch to begin a forced march on Bordeaux. Assuming it departs the beachhead by 4:00AM on D-Day at the latest – or at least that its forward elements depart by then – it could reach the outskirts of Bordeaux by about 2:00 PM on D+1. This is based on the speeds with which other units of similar size and quality have travelled in forced foot marches under similar conditions. BTW, this is a total march of 78km in 34 hours, one of the best in history.

Unfortunately, it is unrealistic to assume that nobody would escape from a town of 9,000 inhabitants to reach Bordeaux and warn the inhabitants there; and this is neglecting the likelihood of a telegraph office in Arcachon (or assuming that the line was cut). In addition, Bordeaux is the headquarters of France’s XIX Corps, housing its depot companies; it is also the country’s sixth largest city and third largest port. To expect it to be captured without a fight is overly optimistic.The AmbushGiven the route that the 1st Brigade would likely cover and the speed with which it would likely move, a night ambush in the wee hours of D+1 would have to have taken place somewhere in between Marcheprime and Gazinet, in the Bois de Laperge. Unfortunately, getting even as far as Gazinet would have taken any significant body of Territorials most of the afternoon of D-Day themselves, and that’s assuming a forced march on their part. Consequently I must assume that the ambush was conducted only by a single company (or two), and while that might result in significant losses, it would hardly destroy 1st Brigade. If 1st Brigade is comprised of 8 battalions, each of 1,000 men, then in road march column it will take up over 2 miles of road; even it is actually a Napoleonic-style demi-brigade, it will take up over 1 mile of road. The ambushing force would be to small too pull off that big of an attack.

What the ambush will do, of course, is force the Mexicans to get off the road and advance on Gazinet in skirmish line, which will delay their arrival outside Bordeaux by several hours (and that assumes no further resistance from the Territorials).

Coming Soon: Correcting Capital Ship Insanity, or why the Dual Monarchy is only going to claim one (1) dreadnought, like we actually had...

the Dual Monarchy had 21 Pre-Dreadnaughts and 1 Dreadnaught in 1912 and as for Italy they had 16 PDs and 3 Dreads


I us this site http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/

though it takes more time then just looking at somthing and knowing the number, i also have checked many ships the french built after 1906 (launch of the HMS Dreadnaught) and they didn't finish there first dread till 1911. though France could have up to 3 Dreads depending on the date

the Dual Monarchy had 18 Pre-Dreadnaughts and 4 Dreadnaughts in 1912 and as for Italy they had 16 PDs and 3 Dreads


I us this site http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/

though it takes more time then just looking at somthing and knowing the number, i also have checked many ships the french built after 1906 (launch of the HMS Dreadnaught) and they didn't finish there first dread till 1911. though France could have up to 3 Dreads depending on the date
Speaking of how many ships were buil before 1912, I've counted only 22 Italian Destroyers. In his factbook, Voxio mentions 49.

http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/italian_destroyers.htm

I don't see a separate 'Dreadnoughts' category. Where are they listed?

as Dreadnaughts are Battleships they would be under Battleships...

and thats 49 destroyers as of 1915. they only had 22 in 1912.

as Dreadnaughts are Battleships they would be under Battleships...

and thats 49 destroyers as of 1915. they only had 22 in 1912.
But we are in 1912, right?

I've counted

- 29 French Battleships built by September 22, 1911. Two more were completed in September 1912 and November 1912.

- 41 Cruisers (I think) built by 1908.

- 77 Destroyers built by September 14 1912.

- 72 Submarines by September 1912.

- 9 Torpedo Cruisers.

- I'm not very sure about the Torpedo Boats. :confused:

The following are my rulings (as a mod) or comments on the action thus far:

On the French MilitiaThere wasn’t any.The term of service was lengthened to 3 years in 1911 or 1912 (I’m assuming 1912), but this doesn’t change the basic breakdown of reserves. As Bogie has pointed out, virtually every able-bodied man in France has served for 2-3 years, the exception being future civil servants, who usually get out after 1 year.

Consequently, General Mobilisation brings all able-bodied men to the colours; except for invalids and old men over 45, there would simply be nobody left to take a hunting vacation in August or September among the pine barrens of Southwestern France.

The last 12 years of reserves – men aged 34 through 45 – are given over to the Territorial Army.Which is another way of saying they assemble at their local depots and defend their homes from attack. Not a militia, exactly, but this would be the force that would likely first meet the brunt of any Mexican invasion. Since France mobilised sometime in early August, 1912, these men would be in the field and ready to fight.

How many would there be? That depends on the local population. Which means that the other 3,450,000 would constitute the second line of reserves and the Territorial Army – those forces that would likely be left behind in the departments to defend the hinterland from attack.

The good news (for Mexico) is that these men would be old(er), (relatively) out of shape, and rusty in their fighting skills; in addition, their weapons would be of older make (approaching obsolence) and ammunition in short supply (not to mention transport); they would basically be static fortress troops.

The bad news (for Mexico) is that there would be a lot of them and they would be defending their homes, which would give them higher (initial) morale and better knowledge of the ground.

So how many men would there me in any given department? With a total French population of 39,252,245 (in 1906), it would seem reasonable to take 8.8% of the local population and assume those men to be assembled at the department seat or at key points around the department. This would imply about 18,000 men in Bordeaux and another 20,000 or so in the surrounding countryside to the south and west; Arcachon would have only been defended by 2-3 companies of Territorials (essentially a short battalion). Many of these men would be set as pickets at key points overlooking the sea or key road junctions, and there would be both roadblocks and patrols, especially so close to the Spanish border.On the Terrain and CommunicationsIt would appear that Bogie’s assertion that the area is mostly wooded with sandy or marshy soil seems to be correct (I have other sources that verify this claim as well).

It is also reasonable that the landing near Arcachon resulted in the news being transmitted back to Bordeaux, and indeed throughout the surrounding area – this is, after all, one of the largest ports in the region. Therefore the likelihood of Mexican forces catching the French further inland napping seems quite slim, although the assembly of troops from further inland may take as much as a week or more.On Landing and Movement SpeedsAlthough Thrashia has assumed that his troops land right at Arcachon, this really isn’t possible. Instead, his soldiers would have to land opposite the dune-field running from Pointe d’Archachon south to Biscarrosse-Plage, a strand of about 6-7 miles in length. The dunes here do reach a height of over 100’, and there is a 20’-30’ palisade on the inland side of the dune field (a couple of hundred yards inland) that would have to be demolished, but that would be relatively simple work for combat engineers. From here, it is about 10 miles to the southern outskirts of Arcachon, and another 15 miles or so to the eastern edge of the Bassin d’Archachon.

While this is probably the likeliest beach for miles around to support an invasion, it is still unlikely that it was guarded, so the landing by Thrashia’s Mexicans would have been unopposed. Assuming a tolerable sea state, seagoing vessels could drop anchor just over half a mile offshore; over-the-rail operations would have then meant that the initial wave of Mexican invaders (all light infantry) would have had to row toward shore in longboats; assuming a reasonable number per vessel and a reasonable speed in the water, each vessel brought inshore could have probably discharged about 150-200 men per hour, give or take a few – but no cavalry or heavy equipment.

A realistic landing would therefore see each large transport disgorge a full battalion in 5-6 hours (which, assuming that the landing started just after midnight, would leave these battalions ready to advance from the beach by 7:00-8:00 AM; the second wave of soldiers would be ashore by shortly after noon, and depart the beach by 1:00-2:00 PM). On the flanks, independent companies would have been dispatched to secure Biscarrosse-Plage along the southern edge of the landing zone, and could have easily taken it in less than an hour after the landing. Another company probably could have made Biscarrosse proper shortly after dawn, but any deeper advance would have had to come after sunrise.

At the northern end of the landing zone, independent companies probably could have pushed to Pilat-Plage, Pyla Sur Mer, and La Teste-de-Buch (on the outskirts of Archachon) by dawn. Given that Arcachon would probably have at least a couple of companies and possibly as much as a battalion of Territorials in garrison, there would have been a fight for the city, although probably not a stiff one. If the Mexicans could get at least three regiments or demibrigades (10,000-12,000 men) ashore by dawn near the northern end of their landing zone, they could have mounted a fairly serious assault on the town by 9:00-10:00 AM at the latest, and cleared the town by early afternoon.

I will now assume that the 1st Brigade, rolling off the beach before dawn, uses the assault on Arcachon to cover its movement eastward, and slips past La Teste-de-Buch to begin a forced march on Bordeaux. Assuming it departs the beachhead by 4:00AM on D-Day at the latest – or at least that its forward elements depart by then – it could reach the outskirts of Bordeaux by about 2:00 PM on D+1. This is based on the speeds with which other units of similar size and quality have travelled in forced foot marches under similar conditions. BTW, this is a total march of 78km in 34 hours, one of the best in history.

Unfortunately, it is unrealistic to assume that nobody would escape from a town of 9,000 inhabitants to reach Bordeaux and warn the inhabitants there; and this is neglecting the likelihood of a telegraph office in Arcachon (or assuming that the line was cut). In addition, Bordeaux is the headquarters of France’s XIX Corps, housing its depot companies; it is also the country’s sixth largest city and third largest port. To expect it to be captured without a fight is overly optimistic.The AmbushGiven the route that the 1st Brigade would likely cover and the speed with which it would likely move, a night ambush in the wee hours of D+1 would have to have taken place somewhere in between Marcheprime and Gazinet, in the Bois de Laperge. Unfortunately, getting even as far as Gazinet would have taken any significant body of Territorials most of the afternoon of D-Day themselves, and that’s assuming a forced march on their part. Consequently I must assume that the ambush was conducted only by a single company (or two), and while that might result in significant losses, it would hardly destroy 1st Brigade. If 1st Brigade is comprised of 8 battalions, each of 1,000 men, then in road march column it will take up over 2 miles of road; even it is actually a Napoleonic-style demi-brigade, it will take up over 1 mile of road. The ambushing force would be to small too pull off that big of an attack.

What the ambush will do, of course, is force the Mexicans to get off the road and advance on Gazinet in skirmish line, which will delay their arrival outside Bordeaux by several hours (and that assumes no further resistance from the Territorials).

Coming Soon: Correcting Capital Ship Insanity, or why the Dual Monarchy is only going to claim one (1) dreadnought, like we actually had...


Basiclly you summed up everything, I have about as little time as Bog, and not only that but like 7-8 other rps, and some on other forums :eek:. So what NO put here, is what I will be following as a basis of whats already happened. I will, when I have the time, alter my posts accordingly.

But we are in 1912, right?

I've counted

- 29 French Battleships built by September 22, 1911. Two more were completed in September 1912 and November 1912.

- 41 Cruisers (I think) built by 1908.

- 77 Destroyers built by September 14 1912.

- 72 Submarines by September 1912.

- 9 Torpedo Cruisers.

- I'm not very sure about the Torpedo Boats. :confused:

last i checked i got 40 cruisers, 62 submarines, 29 Non-Dreadnaught BS, 1-3 Dreadnaughts and 79 destroyers. i could check again

i would say just pick a random number from 20 to 100 or somthing for the TBs

I'll post my factbook for Canada now. :D

Also, I think you guys should know. New Helghast, the guy who was in this RPG, probably isn't coming back. He and every other nation in my region have gone inactive. I don't know why. So when they all start getting deleted, I'll probably have to move on.
I don't know if they were all the same person or if they were riding in the same car(;) ).

Also, I think you guys should know. New Helghast, the guy who was in this RPG, probably isn't coming back. He and every other nation in my region have gone inactive. I don't know why. So when they all start getting deleted, I'll probably have to move on.D_mn. D_mn, d_mn, d_mn, double d_mn.

Gotta love that. Get into a game, strip up trouble, quit. Now I have to try and run nations on both sides of this g_dd_mn_d war.

Maybe I'll just figure out a way to get Teddy Roosevelt assassinated...

Voxio, you can't attack my fleet while it carries troops to Corsica. I've already declared they're patrolling between Corsica and Sardinia. Anyway, it is my impression you declared war after the Abyssinians attacked you (at least that's the order of your posts). You can also check Narodna's timeline:
August 29th, 1912 – French divisions begin to arrive at Toulon.
August 30th, 1912 – French fleet leaves Toulon. Two Italian divisions now on Sardinia.
August 31st, 1912 – French fleet drops first division off on Corsica, heads back for Toulon.
September 1st, 1912 – Ethiopian forces enter Djibouti; colony officially transferred to Ethiopian control. French fleet back in Toulon.
September 2nd, 1912 – French fleet begins to ferry second division to Corsica. German western forces begin demobilisation.
September 3rd, 1912 – Second French division dropped off on Corsica. Last of the 10,000 Italian troops to leave East Africa depart. Four Italian divisions now on Sardinia. Greece begins demobilisation.
September 4th, 1912 – French fleet returns to Toulon. All Italian forces now in position.
September 5th, 1912 – Ethiopian armies receive word that Italian withdrawal is complete, begin moving up to the border. French fleet departs Toulon with last division.
September 6th, 1912 – Ethiopians begin invasion of Eritrea and Somalia. French drop off last division on Corsica.
September 7th, 1912 – French leave Djibouti in haste, leaving all gear behind. French fleet assumes position between Corsica and Sardinia. Italy begins mobilising 90,000 men for East African war. K.u.k. dispatches a protected cruiser and two destroyers to the Red Sea.
This puts your declaration of war after September 6, so my ships are already between Corsica and Sardinia by the time you can move your fleet against them. Anyway, I was planning something myself. For the beginning, please tell me:
IC:
Vittorio Belloumini sighed as he sepped away from the ship. After such a long trip by ship he still had a days march. Turning to the soldier to his left he asked
"Hell of a ride eh?"
"Yea, but it'll be midl when compared to tomorrows march. Gonna be at least a days forced march to catch up with the first division."
In the harbor he could see several other transport ships waiting to drop the full second division on land. Beyond those were 2 Dreadnaughts, 10 destroyers and at least two-dozen torpedo boats.
Is this happening in Sardinia?

EDIT: I think I'm going to make some adjustements to what I said. I'm reading right now the old posts regarding this mess.

Finally!!!

IC:
"You wanted to see me Cousin?"

"Yes Yes, come in" King Victor replied "I am growing concerned."

"Oh?"

"Yes, I have the feeling there were French hands behind the Abyssinian attacks"

"But did they not lose territory as well?"

"Yes, but that is what leads me to believe this."

"I don't understand"

"Don't you see? They just left, no war, nothing. They dropped out of land in the horn of Africa...ther only remaining influence they had in the Red sea." He continues" Why would they leave something that valuable unless their was something for them to gain."

"I see your point sir, but why am I here?"

"Those 4 divisions I gave you, take them to Sardinia. With the Alps heavily guarded, I'd expect their first attacks to be on the shores of Sardinia, the origin of Italy."
The timeline and this post are seriously out of sync. The four Italian divisions were sent to Sardinia in response to the Ethiopian invasion of Eritrea and Italian Somaliland.

Final edit: My head hurts trying to figure this out. On one hand, I see in the timeline my fleet assuming position between Corsica and Sardinia. On the other, I see it's still carrying troops. If war was declared before the shipment of troops was completed, there are two possibilities:

- my fleet was carrying troops to Corsica when war was declared. In this case, it unloads them, returns to mainland France to receive armament and stuff, moves into position between Corsica and Sardinia. If some troops haven't been carried to Corsica, they are to return to the Alps.

- my fleet was returning from Corsica. As above, but without unloading the French soldiers.

If we start a simmilar conflict in the future, it's advisable to add dates to all our moves from the beginning. The Balkan Wars were much easier because of this.

I use two methods to calculate the strength of a country’s fleet: Using the data at http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/, I identify all ships that have been commissioned prior to the scenario date and deduct all ships that have been retired from service. Note that many navies leave ships on their rolls even when they are no longer seaworthy, either for harbour or coastal defence. If no such assignment is indicated, you would be within your rights to use it, but any ship more than 20-25 years old (IOW, launched between 1887 and 1892) should be treated as suspect, not only because it is obsolete but because it is probably in poor condition as well.


Using a 1914 fleet list (like the one at http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm), subtract any vessel commissioned in the last two years and add any vessel retired in the same time period.The two methods should produce roughly the same results.

Let’s use the k.u.k. Kriegsmarine as an example: Battleships: Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand, Radetzky. Zrinyi, Erzherzog Karl, Erzherzog Friedrich, Erzherzog Ferdinand Max, Habsburg, Arpad, Barenberg, Monarch, Wien, Budapest, Kronprinz Erzherzog Rudolf, Tegetthoff, Prinz Eugen, Don Juan D'Austria


Armoured Cruisers: Kaiser Karl VI, Sankt Georg, Kaiserin and Konigin Maria Theresa


Protected Cruisers: Admiral Spaun, Zenta, Aspern, Szigetvár, Kaiserin Elisabeth, Kaiser Franz Joseph I


Scout Cruisers: Donau, Saida, Schwarzenberg


Destroyers: Csikós, Dinara, Huszár, Pandur, Reka, Scharfschütze, Streiter, Turul, Ulan, Uskoke, Velebit, Wildfang, Magnet, Meteor, Blitz, Komet, Satellit, Trabant, Planet


Torpedo Boats: Tb50E, Tb51T-Tb63T, Tb64F-Tb73F, TbI-TbXII, Tb13-Tb17


Torpedo Gunboats: Lacroma, Panther, Leopard


Submarines: U4-U6, U1-U2This list is similar – but not identical – to the 1914 OOB published at http://www.gwpda.org/naval/fdah0001.htm. The differences have been established by careful research using a number of sources. Ships in blue are second-rate or limited in some way; ships in light blue are questionable (verging on worthless).

Therefore, for those interested in totals: Battleships - 9+3


Armored Cruisers – 3


Protected Cruisers – 4+2


Scout Cruisers – 0+1


Destroyers – 17+3


Torpedo Boats – 24+16


Torpedo Gunboats – 3


Submarines – 4+2Where a “+” appears, the number that follows is the number of second-rate vessels.

Harbour defence ships, tenders, hulks, etc., are not included in these totals.

The only reason the timeline is bent out of shape is because of your highly organised, politically united, telepathic Ethiopians with radios.

I'm going to overhaul the timeline anyway - after I'm done assigning everyone realistic Naval OOB's.

BTW, I notice that you're still ignoring my cruiser...

The only reason the timeline is bent out of shape is because of your highly organised, politically united, telepathic Ethiopians with radios.
Don't you think you're a bit mean? Why don't we speak about the 15 year old Lij Iyasu?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyasu_V_of_Ethiopia

If the Ethipians were already mobilized at the borders, there's no problem. The Italians start leaving East Africa. Two days later, the French tell it to the Ethiopians. After another two days, Ras Iyasu arrives in Addis Ababa. Let's say it takes him three days to persuade the regent. After that, the council takes his time deliberating and decides in the seventh day of discutions to attack the Italians. Riders are sent to alert the armies to attack on a certain date, when the Italians must have left the colonies (alternatively, if you wish, the French see the last Italian soldiers have left, transmit the information to the Abyssinians, who then send riders to the armies on the frontiers; in this case, the attack takes place eight or nine days after the Italians have finished withdrawing). It takes them seven days to alert everybody. We see that in three weeks, the armies can be alerted.

Of course, my whole construction crumbles if you show me the Abyssinians really needed seven months to get to the frontiers, or if Lij Iyasu is only 15. But otherwise, the Africans didn't need either to be telepathic or to have radios.
I'm going to overhaul the timeline anyway - after I'm done assigning everyone realistic Naval OOB's.
I'm happy we'll finally have realistic data to work with.
BTW, I notice that you're still ignoring my cruiser...
Do you want me to sink it?:p

Nevermind about rejoining. I joined another RPG. Maybe if a good nation in this one frees up, I'll rejoin.

See you later, and remember: violence and brave charges solve everyone's problems in the early 20th century. Just ask General Haig. ;)

Here’s my take on the strength of the Regia Marina Italiana in 1912: Battleships: Napoli, Regina Elena, Roma, Vittorio Emanuele, Benedetto Brin, Regina Margerhita, Emanuele Filiberto, Ammiraglio Di Saint Bon, Sardegna, Andrea Doria, Dandolo


Armoured Cruisers: Amalfi, Pisa, San Giorgio, San Marco, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Francesco Ferruccio, Varese, Carlo Alberto, Vettor Pisani, Marco Polo,


Protected Cruisers: Calabria, Etruria, Puglia, Etna


Scout Cruisers: Agordat, Marsala, Nino Bixio, Quarto, Piemonte


Torpedo Cruisers: Goito, Montebello


Destroyers: Indomito, Alpino, Pontiere, Carabiniere, Fuciliere, Ascaro, Artigliere, Corazziere, Garibaldino, Lanciere, Nembo, Turbine, Aquilone, Borea, Espero, Zeffiro, Lampo, Dardo, Strale, Euro, Ostro, Bersagliere, Granatiere,Fulmine


Torpedo Boats: Cigno, Calliope, Clio, Cassiopea, Spica, Sirio, Saffo, Scorpione, Sagittario, Serpente, Airone, Alcione, Arpia, Albatros, Astore, Calipso, Climene, Pegaso, Perseo, Pallade, Olimpia, Orfeo, Orsa, Orione, 2PN, 3PN, 4PN, 6PN, 7PN, 8PN, 9PN, 10PN 11PN, 12PN, 13OS, 14OS, 15OS, 16OS, 17OS, 18OS, 19OS, 20OS, 21OS, 22OS, 23OS, 24OS, 25AS, 26AS, 27AS, 28AS, 29AS, 30AS, 33PN, 34PN, 35PN, 36PN, 37PN, Procione, 1PN, 5PN, Centauro, Canopo


Submarines: Atropo, Argo, Fisalia, Jalea, Jantina, Medusa, Salpa, Velella, Zoea, Foca, Glauco, Otaria, Narvalo, Squalo, Tricheco, Delfino


Minelayers: Minerva, Partenope,Tripoli, Again, what we have is not a lot different from what you see at http://www.gwpda.org/naval/fdin0001.htm. Of course, like the previous list for the k.u.k Kriegsmarine, the foregoing does not include troop ships, support ships (such as colliers, oilers, munitions ships, accommodation ships, training ships [of various kinds], small craft used to ferry flag officers and dignitaries, etc.), harbour defence ships (such as guard ships, patrol boats, floating batteries, etc.), hulks or other condemned ships waiting to be scrapped, ships under construction (or undergoing refit), experimental vessels, and – most importantly of all – newly finished warships still undergoing sea trials and not yet ready for service.

As with the previous list, vessels in blue are older ships or ships near retirement (and therefore likely of poorer quality), while ships in light blue are highly questionable (very old, possibly not seaworthy, or simply ships whose status is suspect).

As before, here’s a summary of the fleet: Battleships – 8


Armoured Cruisers – 9+1


Protected Cruisers – 3


Scout Cruisers – 4


Destroyers – 21+2


Torpedo Boats – 58+3


Submarines – 16


Minelayers – 2+1As before, the second number (after the “+”) is the number of second-rate vessels.

At this point certain players (you know who you are) are undoubtedly licking their chops and envisioning the conquest of Europe (or at least command of its coasts) with their vastly larger fleet. All I can say is: don’t. Your turn will come.

BTW, it’s interesting to compare the actual effective strengths of the two Adriatic fleets (those of Italy and the Dual Monarchy). This was the “other” great naval race of the years leading up to WWI (besides the Anglo-German race; there were actually three, because the so-called “ABC Powers” [Argentina, Brazil, and Chile] were also caught up in their own naval rivalry). You can see how close the two fleets were in size, with the slight edge going to Italy.

I consider this confirmation that my method for determining effective strength is essentially correct.

Before continuing, I should point out something else: Italy had naval assets all over the world, including cruisers on tour (“showing the flag”). She even had a couple of patrol boats in the Far East (including one at Shanghai; that’ll be interesting when Warta Endor’s Japanese forces land).

The reason I mention this is because (and Bogie isn’t going to like this one bit) Italy maintained significant naval assets in the Red Sea and East Africa. Usually there was at least one protected cruiser (in fact, that’s what that whole class of Italian protected cruisers was for – colonial rather than European service) along with a few gunboats (stationed at Massawa in Eritrea) and – of all things – a balloon tender.

You learn something new every day, and building a balloon tender is something I never would have imagined doing. But I can see how one (or two – the Italians actually had a few) would be useful. What, you may ask, is a balloon tender? Well, it’s a ship that can drop anchor and then loft a barrage balloon. So now, perhaps you’re wondering, what good is that?

Stick around, and you’ll find out. Oh, you clever Italians. I salute you...

Narodana, check your TG's. :)

Bogie, did you think I was going to send my entire fleet to Corsica? I sent a small number of ships to escort them and a few to keep it safe.

Thanks for the list NO.

I am afraid that because of upcoming semester final exams I will be having to exit this rp. NO, I leave you to handle my nation and reasources until another player wishes to take it. I trust you can handle it. Thanks and sorry to leave.

I am afraid that because of upcoming semester final exams I will be having to exit this rp. NO, I leave you to handle my nation and reasources until another player wishes to take it. I trust you can handle it. Thanks and sorry to leave.
God, I had the best laugh of the day! It was most likely nervous laughter, and I'll recover and cry in a few minutes, but it's really amusing (ignoring the fact we're affected by this). I guess now Narodna will have to control both Mexico and the US, while they are fighting!

P.S. I've recovered from the shock. *sobbing* What will we do about this war!?!

Bogie, did you think I was going to send my entire fleet to Corsica? I sent a small number of ships to escort them and a few to keep it safe.

Thanks for the list NO.
I didn't think anything. I simply saw your post:
IC:
Vittorio Belloumini sighed as he sepped away from the ship. After such a long trip by ship he still had a days march. Turning to the soldier to his left he asked
"Hell of a ride eh?"
"Yea, but it'll be midl when compared to tomorrows march. Gonna be at least a days forced march to catch up with the first division."
In the harbor he could see several other transport ships waiting to drop the full second division on land. Beyond those were 2 Dreadnaughts, 10 destroyers and at least two-dozen torpedo boats.

You learn something new every day, and building a balloon tender is something I never would have imagined doing. But I can see how one (or two – the Italians actually had a few) would be useful. What, you may ask, is a balloon tender? Well, it’s a ship that can drop anchor and then loft a barrage balloon. So now, perhaps you’re wondering, what good is that?
I learn something every day. Today, for example, I learned that a ballon tender is a ship that can drop anchor and then loft a barrage baloon. Right now I'm wondering, not what good is that, but what is a barrage baloon. Could it be a baloon that will direct the artillery fire of a few ships right on top of my highly organised, politically united, telepathic Ethiopians with radios? :p

I thought Barrage Ballons were launched to hinder low flying airplanes:confused:

But balloons were used for artillery spotting in the US civil war and the Russo-Japanese war.

Hmmm. You could be right on that terminology, WE. But the balloons used by the Italians on their balloon tenders aren't that kind of balloon; they are, in fact, the other type. Properly, then I guess those would be observation balloons?

Whatever you call them, I think its a great idea. If I'd had one in the Balkans, it would have been stationed right off the coast of Montenegro.

Anyone know how far you could see from an observation balloon? Mecca's only maybe 50 miles from the sea...

It would certainly be very nice. Especially with dry, clear weather (not very hard in a desert climate) you can see a long way. Only problem is...damn, I'll try to explain it in English.

If air becomes hot, it rizes, creating a sort of haze which blurs the view of a person. This could limit the distance seen. (bet you all have seen a road on a hot summer day. If you look along the road, you see hot air rising. Same's with jetengines BTW)

Don't know if I explained it correctly though...

Know what you mean, don't know what it's called.

The biggest problem with these baloons is that they are very vulnerable. You can shot them down very easily, which is why you don't see them being used very often.

shoot them down with what? Infintry isn't going to be looking up, no ship in 1912 had AA, and would not be looking up, and airplanes are still rare

shoot them down with what? Infintry isn't going to be looking up, no ship in 1912 had AA, and would not be looking up, and airplanes are still rare
Pardon me for not understanding the looking up thing. Are you saying there's some physical obstacle preventing people from looking up? I have to remind you we're talking about baloons. One small puncture and they're gone.

Here’s a web page on Observation Balloons On The Western Front (of WWI) (http://www.westernfront.co.uk/thegreatwar/articles/research/balloons.htm).The kite balloons were usually located 5.5-km metres (3 miles) behind the front line trenches at a distance apart of 20 to 25km (12 to 15 miles). At these bases they would await suitable wind and weather conditions so the observation balloons could ascend bearing a tethering cable and a telephone line. The optimal operating altitude varied between 1,000 and 1,500 metres (3,000 and 4,000 feet). Sometimes a group of three or four balloons were sent aloft simultaneously. In view of the distance that the balloon sections were located behind the front-line trenches, this normally took the tethered balloons clear of effective small arms and artillery fire…

The possibility of hitting a balloon, or its basket, with an artillery shell must have been exceedingly difficult in three-dimensional space at the operating altitude of the balloon. Presumably, a shell that was accurate would pass through the balloon without exploding, unless very sensitive contact fuses were present, which they certainly weren’t in the early part of the Great War. Due to the volume of the gas and air in the balloon, even though the hole(s) in the envelope might well cause the balloon to collapse, there could be time to winch the balloon down to safety - at the normal winch speed this took about 10 minutes - or the for the crew to use their parachutes.

Although observation balloons were also occasionally shot down by small-arms fire, this was surprisingly difficult to achieve due to the distances and altitude involved. Ordinary rifle and machine gun bullets would pass relatively harmlessly through the hydrogen gas bag, causing damage but not immediate destruction. Hits on the balloonist’s rather flimsy woven wicker car would be an entirely different matter.Note the distance from the front and altitude of operation – 5500m back and 1500m aloft. That means that a rifle shot would have to travel something like 6000m to hit a balloon – and would be very hard to aim properly (without the use of tracers), given the arc and the fact that the effect of winds aloft would be impossible to gauge (how would you tell how much you had missed by, in order to correct your next shot?). Most rifles of the day had nothing like this kind of range (in fact, they barely had the range to reach the necessary altitude!).In terms of range, the average during the war was around 1,400 metres, although accuracy could only be guaranteed at around 600 metres.Some Steyr hunting rifles could reach 2200m accurately (with a telescopic scope), but that was firing horizontally; a climbing shot would be severely attenuated by the pull of gravity.During WW1 the French sharpshooters and snipers used scoped Lebel Mle1886/93 and Berthier Mle1916 rifles as well as semi-automatic R.S.C. (Ribeyrolle Sutter Chauchat) Mle1917/1918 rifles with iron sights…The article goes on to indicate that the Lebel Mle1886/93 had iron sights capable of assisting a sharpshooter in firing at a target up to 2400m away; the earliest French telescopic sights were limited to a range of 800m.

It would take a very skilled, professional marksman to hit a balloon at all, since – when raised to its maximum altitude - the balloon would be at the very limits of his weapon’s range (and that is assuming that he is standing on the ground very close to its winch). At any significant distance at all, the shot becomes almost impossible.

Next up is the Armada Española: Battleships: Pelayo


Armoured Cruisers: Cataluna, Princesa de Asturias, Carlos V


Protected Cruisers: Reina Regente, Extremadura, Rio De La Plata, Lepanto , Alfonso XIII, Marques de la Ensenada


Scout Cruisers: , Infanta Isabel


Frigates: Numancia


Destroyers: Audaz, Osado, Prosperina, Terror, Destructor


Torpedo Boats: #1-#6, Dona Maria de Molina, Marques de la Vitoria, Don Alvaro de Bazan, Temerairo, Nueva Espana, Galicia, Marques de Molins, Martin Alonzo Pinzon, Rapido, Vincente, Halcon, Barcelo, Bustamente , Habana, Orion, Acevedo, Julian OrdonezAgain, vessels in blue are old obsolescent; ones in light blue are highly questionable (possibly immobile, not seaworthy, hulked, out of armament, or even non-existant). In the case of Spain, however, I am far more likely to approve the use of these vessels than I am with other fleets, if only because the Spanish had a reputation for using vessels that were in awful condition or way past their prime (they also failed to maintain the vessels they had as well as they could have, which is why even some of the newer vessels are rated as questionable).

To reiterate, here’s the overall count: Battleships - 0+1


Armoured Cruisers - 3


Protected Cruisers - 4+1


Destroyers - 0+4


Torpedo Boats - 9+10I’ve been pretty generous with the torpedo boats, although that may not be as great a sin as it seems. There are different ways of counting such craft, and so some lists that provide a far lower number may be counting only certain kinds of vessels and not others. In addition, Spain had many more gunboats than most navies and made extensive use of mines. If we get to a situation where such vessels may come into play, I’ll credit the these craft to the Spanish player.

(As an aside, the named torpedo boats were redisgnated with numbers, but I don’t have a complete listing and I haven’t fathomed out the underlying system to the point where I can make a decent guess as to the missing ones. But I’ll give it another try after I’ve gotten some of the rest of my huge backlog of work taken care of.)

BTW: I had intended to do Mexico next, and finish with France, but lest Bogie get too big a head (or try to strike before I’ve trimmed him back to size), I’ll do France next. That’s not my biggest reason for the delay, however: my primary reason is that I need to work out the pre-1910 history of Mexico to my satisfaction before I decide how many ships Thrashia should have started the game with (his claims notwithstanding).

Next up is the Armada Española: Battleships: Pelayo


Armoured Cruisers: Cataluna, Princesa de Asturias, Carlos V


Protected Cruisers: Reina Regente, Extremadura, Rio De La Plata, Lepanto , Alfonso XIII, Marques de la Ensenada


Scout Cruisers: , Infanta Isabel


Frigates: Numancia


Destroyers: Audaz, Osado, Prosperina, Terror, Destructor


Torpedo Boats: #1-#6, Dona Maria de Molina, Marques de la Vitoria, Don Alvaro de Bazan, Temerairo, Nueva Espana, Galicia, Marques de Molins, Martin Alonzo Pinzon, Rapido, Vincente, Halcon, Barcelo, Bustamente , Habana, Orion, Acevedo, Julian OrdonezAgain, vessels in blue are old obsolescent; ones in light blue are highly questionable (possibly immobile, not seaworthy, hulked, out of armament, or even non-existant). In the case of Spain, however, I am far more likely to approve the use of these vessels than I am with other fleets, if only because the Spanish had a reputation for using vessels that were in awful condition or way past their prime (they also failed to maintain the vessels they had as well as they could have, which is why even some of the newer vessels are rated as questionable).

To reiterate, here’s the overall count: Battleships - 0+1


Armoured Cruisers - 3


Protected Cruisers - 4+1


Destroyers - 0+4


Torpedo Boats - 9+10I’ve been pretty generous with the torpedo boats, although that may not be as great a sin as it seems. There are different ways of counting such craft, and so some lists that provide a far lower number may be counting only certain kinds of vessels and not others. In addition, Spain had many more gunboats than most navies and made extensive use of mines. If we get to a situation where such vessels may come into play, I’ll credit the these craft to the Spanish player.

(As an aside, the named torpedo boats were redisgnated with numbers, but I don’t have a complete listing and I haven’t fathomed out the underlying system to the point where I can make a decent guess as to the missing ones. But I’ll give it another try after I’ve gotten some of the rest of my huge backlog of work taken care of.)

BTW: I had intended to do Mexico next, and finish with France, but lest Bogie get too big a head (or try to strike before I’ve trimmed him back to size), I’ll do France next. That’s not my biggest reason for the delay, however: my primary reason is that I need to work out the pre-1910 history of Mexico to my satisfaction before I decide how many ships Thrashia should have started the game with (his claims notwithstanding).

my navy will be bigger then that at this point, at the time Spain had little funding for the navy, I have been reforming it, making it the main work of Spain and though it has only been about a year and a ahalf or so the k.u.k has been helping me industialise faster (should make some diff.) though i will make my listed navy smaller. and your list should have a Dreadnaught on it, one was completed in 1912...

my navy will be bigger then that at this point, at the time Spain had little funding for the navy, I have been reforming it, making it the main work of Spain and though it has only been about a year and a ahalf or so the k.u.k has been helping me industialise faster (should make some diff.) though i will make my listed navy smaller. and your list should have a Dreadnaught on it, one was completed in 1912...If you look at everybody else’s navy, you will notice the same thing: where are all the dreadnoughts? The Dual Monarchy had one in 1912 – Viribus Unitis (in fact, it was unique in having the first triple gun turret); Italy had a couple. Mexico, whom I granted a dreadnought earlier, will in fact not get that vessel, and France won’t get it’s brand new shiny dreadnought either (Bogie, you can yell all you want – it won’t do any good). So where are all these magnificent vessels?

Read the fine print: I have only permitted commissioned vessels. Most warship data includes a launch date, but that’s not the date the ship was ready. Not by a d_mn_d sight.

Ships are generally launched as soon as their hulls and main deck fixtures are completed, but there can still be lots of work left to do at that point before the ship can be said to be complete. For warships, turrets and superstructure (including funnels) still need to be added. Sometimes even the powerplant is missing. Why would anyone launch a ship in such an incomplete condition? To get it off the slip so that the next keel can be laid! Slips were the prinicipal limiting factor in a country’s ability to build modern warships (or ships of any kind at all).

So you can usually add another year (at best) to finish the ship. But it’s still not ready for action at that point: it needs a crew, who then take it through its trials, and only after that can it be considered “ready”. Even the commission date can be generous, in some cases – but having nothing else to go on, that’s what I’ve chosen as my benchmark.

Consequently, it should be immediately obvious that nobody ought to have the benefit of increased naval construction efforts, with the possible exception of the Japanese or the Germans. Why would they be an exception? Because Japan ordered extra warships built in Germany back at the start of the game, and Germany subsequently cancelled its naval construction programme. If Germany then filled Japan’s order with vessels that had originally been intended for its own fleet, and if those vessels were chosen from the ones already under construction in 1910, then Japan could have extra warships of German design. Of course, if Germany laid down additional ships in 1910 in response to the order, then Japan is simply out those ships, and the Germans should thank the Japanese for their nice, new battlecruisers (probably by sending them to the Pacific Ocean…).

For everybody else, a purchasing decision in 1910 could at best produce a keel laid that year (although, in the case of some countries, it might be laid the following year); the ship would be launched the following year (with a few months added – 15 months seems to have been the average construction time, but some efforts went a fair amount past that). Add another year for the rest of the work, plus delivery (if you bought it overseas, which most nations did), and then several more months for crew selection, sea trials, etc., and you’d be extremely lucky to have your ship ready in time for this war. Most of the dreadnoughts laid down in 1910 (and there were quite a lot) didn’t join the service until late 1912 or early 1913. I believe that, among the (real and potential) combatants in this war, there are half a dozen new dreadnoughts joining their respective fleets between December, 1912 and February, 1913.

Consider that the HMS Dreadnought, the ship that started this whole building craze, was launched in 1906 and completed later that year. I have no date of commission, but since the so-called “Dreadnought Era” is said to have begun in 1908, you may draw your own conclusions. BTW, the British had a speed advantage when it came to building warships; other countries sometimes took as many as four to five years to take a new dreadnought from the laying of its keel to active service in the fleet.

As far as shipyard construction (or expansion) goes, I will cite Winston Churchill’s famous observation on the speed of industrial mobilization: “In the first year, nothing; in the second, a trickle; in the third, a torrent; and in the fourth, a flood.” It is unrealistic to expect new yards to go from groundbreaking to full operation in under a year, and two or three would not be unreasonable. I’ve thought about this with respect to China’s efforts: I doubt that any of the new slips being built at Shanghai were ready before late 1911, and those would have been the smallest ones, for patrol boats, torpedo boats, submarines. Only now are the slips being finished for destroyers and smallest merchant ships; the bigger slips, for large merchants, ocean liners, and cruisers are likely still a year or two off, and for China to build its own battleships before 1917 or 1918 would, I think, be to much to expect.

I also question (in the case of most nations, though probably not Spain) whether anyone could increase production in anything (warships, artillery, small arms, munitions, whatever) without capital expansion, under the assumption that their nation can simply “divert production from elsewhere”. The arms race leading up to the Great War of 1914-18 was very intense, and most of the nations of Europe were acquire new weapons of all kinds as fast as was humanly possible. For Italy, Germany, France, the Dual Monarchy, Russia, and probably the Porte, faster armament simply was not possible; these nations were already exerting their greatest possible effort. No greater effort was possible. For nations that were not a part of this race (like Spain) a greater effort was possible, and I will take into consideration how much additional material Spain could acquire. To some extent, I’m already doing that in letting Spain increase its shipbuilding cacacity; beyond that, I will look at Britain’s construction efforts and try to figure out whether the British (Spain’s prime contractor for warships) could have taken orders for more vessels. I will also look at domestic (Spanish) yards and try to estimate whether any additional work could be handled. It should be noted, though, that Spain (in RL) did in fact increase its naval spending a little in response to everybody else’s efforts, starting in 1905 or so. That’s where that new dreadnought and your new patrol boats came from, and there are new cruisers and destroyers on the way…

Whoah- some pretty detailed stuff in there, NO.

So assuming China is victorious in the Sino-Japanese war, and immediately starts expanding its Navy for defense, then Chinese battleships and larger will be able to be built around 1920, correct?

I'm curious about what China can produce in terms of war material (for the Sino-Japanese War 2). What can China produce in terms of weapons, guns, trucks, vehicles, and so forth? Also, what is China's potential for "expansion" as you put it in your lengthy post?

I need to know what China is capable of at this point in time so that I can have a better idea what I can and can't do (along with your suggestions). Thanks. :)

COURBET.. Built by Arsenal de Brest and launched 23rd September 1911 and
completed 19th November 1913.
France: Built by A C de la Loire at St Nazaire and launched 7th November
1912 completed August 1914.
Paris: launched 28th September 1912
I will not scream :), but I will argue for these ships. Jean Bart, together with Courbet, were launched in September 1911. I see it took about two years for the other Dreadnoughts of France to be completed, but that was during peace time. In the case of the Austro-Hungarian navy, even Prinz Eugen, launched at 17th July 1914, was mentioned as comissioned at the start of the war. Also, Szent Istvan, launched in January 1915, was comissioned in December 1915.

In these conditions, is it implausible to think the French could have commissioned the ships in one year?

While I’m busy reconstructing the French fleet, I figured that I would dole out some work for the rest of you. In particular, I want to hammer down the timeline once and for all. Let’s start with Germany (Relative Liberty):

As I see it, Germany must have begun its mobilisation somewhere between the peak of the Balkan Crisis (on July 27, 1912 – the day the Romanian-controlled Bulgarian “rump” National Assembly declared acceptance of Roumania’s proposed union with Bulgaria ) and its final resolution. This is because (as Bogie has pointed out) Germany used the Balkan Crisis as “cover” for its mobilisation along the French border.

Realistically, Germany would not have done this if it were not (privately) certain that in fact the Balkan Crisis would soon come to a close (although I may be wrong in that assessment – if so, Relative Liberty can correct me). When I wrote the tale of Crown Prince Boris’ odyssey, I had originally intended that he be found on the same day as the aforementioned proclamation; unfortunately, I made a mistake and ended his adventure on June 27th. That would be easy enough to correct: I could easily rewrite the tale, adding a week in hiding here or a few days there; I’m not going to bother, however – I will simply correct the problem now and declare that Boris was discovered by the German SS on July 27th, as I had originally intended. This is (as far as I can see) a harmless change that does nothing to alter the flow of the Balkan Crisis RP thread.

Assuming the Germans arrived at their base camp on the 28th, and dispatched a messenger for the Allied HQ south of Sofia, it is likely that news of his rescue would probably have reached the Allied leadership by the 29th or 30th. As for Boris, the German doctor attached to the SS would have required him to remain in bed until he could be sure that the lad’s shoulder wound was healing nicely; for that, I reckon three days of professional care would be needed. Thus Boris departs for Sofia early on the 1st and arrives at the Allied army HQ on late on August 2nd.

Knowing that Boris would want to announce himself soon and that this would bring an end to the crisis, Germany would want to act sometime between the day it found out that Boris was alive and the day that this fact became public knowledge. That sets the earliest day for German mobilisation as July 30th or 31st, and the latest date as August 2nd. Since the Allies decided not to reveal that Boris was alive until the Romainian and Unionist Bulgarians arrived for talks, and the call for talks wouldn’t have gone out until the 3rd, it is possible that Germany could delay its mobilisation until the 3rd or 4th, but that seems unlikely. OTOH, the German OKH would want a day or two to firm up its plans before mobilising. This led me to originally set a date of August 1st or 2nd for mobilisation, but obviously this will be Relative Liberty’s call.

BTW, the need to bring SS Grüppenführer von Reichenau to Saarbrücken to take command of the SS Cavalry formations there doesn’t change this. Assuming the Grüppenführer arrived outside Sofia on the 2nd (with Boris), he could still be in the Saarland by the 7th at the latest, with his troops arriving after him, just before the 15th. How could von Riechenau get to the French frontier from Bulgaria in just five days? Simple. Balkan Wars RP participants will remember that Generalmajor Pomiankowski (commander of k.u.k forces in Albania) has at least two staff cars with him (actually, by the end of July, he’d have more like half a dozen). Knowing that von Reichenau is going to be outside Sofia on the 2nd, he simply arranges to have a driver waiting for him with his new orders. Then, even with bad weather and mechanical delays, he can be at Goražde to board a train for the French frontier in 2-3 days. The Dual Monarchy would have gladly furnished both von Reichenau and his men with special express trains for the purpose of getting them to their destination on time.

Few other decisions need to be made by Relative Liberty. I assume that Germany would need four days to enter the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine once they were surrendered by France; of course, the German Army could enter the area at a slower pace if desired. I also assume that the Germans would neither cancel mobilisation in the West until France had actually withdrawn nor demobilise until some length of time (a week?) had passed following the occupation; forces in the East, on the other hand (except for 6.Armee) would begin demobilisation the day after the Treaty of Vienna was signed (anything else would be overly provocative). 6.Armee, renamed 1.Königlich Bayernishes Armee (1st Royal Bavarian Army) would depart for Italy immediately upon the completion of its mobilisation, arriving there perhaps 10 days later by rail (the first elements [the Royal Bavarian Cavalry] would arrive on the third day after mobilisation, the rest by brigades after that).

So to summarise, these are the questions that I need Relative Liberty to answer for Germany (answers may be conditional, such as “the day after the Treaty of Vienna is signed”). Where I believe I already know the answer, I’ve provided it in red; Relative Liberty can correct these answers or just say “agreed”. I do, however, need answers specific enough that (once I have everyone else’s answers), I can reconstruct the timeline down to the day: On what day did Germany begin mobilisation near Saarbrücken (this should be between July 30th or 31st and August 3rd or 4th)?


On what day did Germany issue its ultimatum to France? The day France began its mobilisation.


How long did it take Führer von Richthofen to respond to the proposed settlement? One day (more would be problematic).


When did German demobilisation begin in the East? The day after the Treaty of Vienna was signed (longer would be problematic).


When did German troops begin their entry into Alsace and Lorraine? Within hours of the French announcement that their withdrawal had been completed (so essentially on the same or next day, depending on the hour).


How long did it take for Germany to fully occupy these two provinces? Four days.


When did Germany begin its demobilisation in the West? One week (seven days) after the occupation of Alsace and Lorrain was completed.


When did Germany halt its demobilisation? Two days after Japan invaded China or one day after war broke out between Italy and France, whichever came first (this means that it is possible that demobilisation [I]never occured.


When do the Bavarians arrive in Italy? The first elements arrive 17 days after German mobilisation begins; the rest of the army arrives over the next 8 days (it takes a day or two to form up in reserve after the rail transfer, so the army can actually start doing something 26-27 days after Germany begins its mobilisation).There may be other questions that need to be answered, but I think that represents a good start.

I’ll build my timeline next (at least for the Dual Monarchy; American and Mexican timelines will come later). The Dual Monarchy began its mobilisation on July 15th. Its mobilisation was completed on August 1st.


Diplomats were dispatched and telegrammes sent to Russia on the same day France began its general mobilisation. Russia agreed to delay its mobilisation for 48 hours to facilitate negotiation – but not one minute longer.


Russia and the Dual Monarchy reached an agreement on a proposed settlement to present France and Germany in Vienna just hours before the above deadline.


The meeting between representatives of the Dual Monarchy, Russia, France, and Germany occurred on the third day after France began its mobilisation.


The day after the Treaty of Vienna was signed, k.u.k. forces began a withdrawal from the Russian border. The reached the nearest railheads within the next two days after that.


The k.u.k. Kriegsmarine left Pola the day after France began its mobilisation. It arrived in Taranto the following day.


The k.u.k. Kriegsmarine left Trieste for Naples the day after Spain invaded Morocco. It arrived in Naples the following day and left for the Western Mediterranean two days later. Its cruiser pickets arrived off Algiers, Marseilles, and Toulon the day after that and then dropped anchor.


A small divison of vessels left Taranto for Haifa on the same day as the main fleet left for Naples. This division reached Haifa two days later. It put back to sea on either the day after Japan invaded China or the day after Ethiopia invaded Eritrea and Italian Somaliland.


The various k.u.k. detachments in Palestine, Syria, and Arabia arrived in late April and were reinforced over the next few months, reaching full strength by mid-July. Their goal is to complete the training of Arab forces in these areas by the end of Ramadan (mid-September).


The German SS Division sent with trench mortars to Arabia will arrive during Ramadan and begin training for desert warfare by the middle of the month of Ramadan (around September 1st).


The Dual Monarchy’s declaration of war against Japan came the day after Japan invaded China. The day after Germany’s declaration of war on Japan, the Dual Monarchy began assembling forces to assist the German-led expeditionary force.


K.u.k. forces began to be assembled for operations in East Africa on the day after Ethiopia invaded Eritrea and Italian Somaliland. The division based at Haifa was dispatched for the Red Sea at that same time.This should be all I need to contribute to the timeline for now.

Sorry y'all, gonna be slightly too busy to post much for week or so. My second D&D group has decided to have a new campaign and I'm the person who knows the most about the game which means I have to teach the newbs how to play and create characters. This is on top of the games I'm already running at school with another group.

I'm going to give NO the right to control Italy until further notice. He knows what I intend to have done and I trust him to do the right thing. I'll still be reading the topic though, so if I see a reason to post I will do so.

BTW, If anybody is interested, I'm playing a Male Human Bard.

1, The first of August, before dinner time.
2, Agreed
3, Agreed
4, Early the day after ToV
5, Agreed
6, Agreed, although some of the more pro-France areas would prove difficult to control
7, Agreed
8, Agreed
9, Agreed

Perhaps you didn't understand. Morocco hired Frencmen as officers of their army. After you occupied Morocco, some of them organized a resistance, as shown in my old post. That guy can't confess that France was 'behind the resistance', because it's not true.

I have not edited my post yet, and it doesn't realy matter if France is behind it or not, Spain considers the French officers that Morocco is using to be an act of agression by France. the French Government could pull them back into France but they have not.

OOC: You're certainly changing it.I most certainly am not, sir! Do you forget this post (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9811236&postcount=971)? Just because New Helgast either overlooked it or refused to take it seriously does not mean I have to be as stupid. Then, too, New Helgast repeatedly ignored my warnings that he could not retroactively increase American preparations for war just because we allowed Mexico to increase its strength before he joined. Consequently I am going to ignore those moves he made that I feel are unrealistic. America could not go from haveing 98,000 men under arms to 1.1 million in a week, let alone shift to a fully mobilised war economy in the same length of time. Nonethless, to be fair to you, I will still have America act - but not in suicidal fashion.Anyway, I see you now control Austria-Hungary, Italy, the U.S. of A. and Mexico. Neat!:DOh, sure. Like I need the work.

Believe me, after I fix Mexico and the United States, I will peddle them off. Italy is only temporary, and I've had extensive talks with Voxio, so I know what he wants. Why don't we take advantage of his absence to fix the timeline and finish setting the forces involved?

Thank you, Relative Liberty, for your swift response!

Now it is Spain’s turn. Nebarri_Prime has only a handfull of questions to answer to help reconstruct the timeline, so this should be a brief post.

Spain is one of two nations (Italy was the other) to mobilise in response to France’s threatened invasion of Portugal. Nebarri_Prime has indicated that Spain never demobilised after that crisis, but this seems doubtful; to maintain a significant percentage of one’s male labour force under arms when there is no war is unnecessarily costly, as this means that these men can not be engaged in agriculture, fishing, mining, manufacture, commerce, etc. What is possible would be for some of Spain’s army to still be in the field and on alert, awaiting demobilisation, when the crisis over Alsace and Lorraine broke out. In fact, this is actually quite likely; the pace of crises in Western Europe during 1912 was fast and furious, and Spain (like Italy or the Dual Monarchy [which was facing crises of its own in the Balkans) would want to demobilise carefully; a hasty or total demobilisation might leave the country unable to remobilise for a month or more!

The 1911 Edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica often makes note of difficulties that nations may have conducting mobilisation; it makes no such note in its description of the Spanish military. This leaves me inclined to set the time required for Spanish mobilisation at the standard interval for most other nations (fourteen days), give or take a day or two depending on other conditions. A safe demobilisation of the army might therefore take as long as six weeks, with remobilisation during this interval – depending on the stage in which demobilisation was reversed – taking a week to ten days (longer further on in the process).

My assumption is that Spain halted its demobilisation and remobilised as soon as France began its mobilisation. The next question, then, is when Spain invaded Morocco (since Spain hasn’t demobilised yet from the crisis over Alsace and Lorraine).

I would venture a guess that Spain would begin taking steps to annex Morocco (or declare it a protectorate) within a few days of the signing of the Treaty of Vienna, and certainly no more than a week. For Spain, this treaty is an opportunity: France and Spain were vying for supremacy in the region, and with France’s hands tied by the protocol, Spain would have a green light to act. The only question remaining is how long it would take for Spain to mass forces for the attack (a declaration of intent to annex or establsh a protectorate could, of course, precede invasion; indeed, this would be a way for Spain to “stake its claim” before France could grab Morocco for itself.

My readings have not yet revealed the number of Spanish soldiers already in Morocco. Unlike France and Italy, Spain did not have significant numbers of native troops in North Africa (not having yet subdued the local populace to the extent where such efforts were possible); the first Regulares were organised in 1911, so there would at this point likely number no more than a couple of regiments; Encyclopedia Britannica (1911 Edition) credits Spain with “4 African battalions of light infantry”, which would be about 4,000 men (it also indicates that Spain had 1 battalion of Spanish infantry posted to Melilla (its principal base in Morocco) along with 1 “regional squadron” of cavalry.

Another source states that Spain had 22,000 men posted to Melilla in 1910, and suggests that this number increased in the years that followed (to as many as 90,000 by 1925).

Still, the invasion of Morocco would require additional men, and these would need to be drawn from the peninsula. It would likely take ten days to two weeks to reinforce the garrison at Melilla or stage a landing on the Atlantic coast, at Casablanca or such. After that, it would probably be at least a few weeks and possibly longer for a French officer leading Moroccan resistance forces to be captured.

So here are the questions that I need Nebarri_Prime to answer, including, as above, my guesses at the answers (in red), which Nebarri_Prime may alter or correct at his discretion: When did Spain mobilise its army (for the first time)? The day after France threatened Portugal with invasion.


When did Spain begin to demobilise its army following the end of the Portuguese Crisis? One week after the fall of the Poincaire government.


When did Spain begin to call its troops back to the colours (partial remobilisation)? The same day as France began its mobilisation.


When did Spain impose a blockade on all French shipping passing through the Straits of Gibratar? On the same day as it began mobilisation; the blockade became effective on the following day, when the battleship Pelayo and its escorts arrived to enforce the blockade.


When did the Pelayo and its escorts stop and sieze the French merchant ship carrying Chilean nitrates (guano) through the Straits of Gilbratar to Marseilles? At least a day after the signing of the Treaty of Vienna, but before the Spanish government declared the annexation of (or establishment of a protectorate over) Morocco.


When did Spanish forces first begin departing for Morocco? At least a day after the signing of the Treaty of Vienna, but no later than the day that Spain declared the annexation of (or establishment of a protectorate over) Morocco, and probably a few days earlier than that (as soon as the government made the decision to add the balance of Morocco to Spain’s colonial empire).


When did Spain actually declare the annexation of (or establishment of a protectorate over) Morocco? At least a day after the signing of the Treaty of Vienna, but probably a few days later; certainly no more than a week to two weeks after the protocol was signed.


When did Spanish troops actually begin moving into Moroccan-controlled territory? No sooner than the same day that Spain declared the annexation of (or establishment of a protectorate over) Morocco, and possibly as late as a few days after enough Spanish troops had arrived to make such an advance possible. At least four divisions would be required to begin any significant advance into Moroccan-controlled territory (not counting men already stationed at Melilla).


When did Spain capture its first French officer? No less than one week after French-led resistance to Spain’s occupation of Morocco began, and probably at least two or three weeks; more than a month, while possible, is unlikely.While some of the suggested dates are ambiguous, I strongly recommend exact answers (“Seventeen days after Moroccan native resistance began,” or such). My goal, again, is to hammer the sequence of events down to the day. Again, Nebarri_Prime, like Relative Liberty, can just say “agreed” where I haven't given a range of dates; where I have given a range, I will need to know precisely how many days into the range the event occurs. Answers may be conditional on some other event, or some action not listed, perhaps one undertaken by another player (“The day after Mexico issued its ultimatum”), although I recommend as little of this as possible to avoid deadlock (two players waiting on each other).

1. agreed
2. agreed
3. agreed
4. agreed
5. 11 days
6. 7 days
7. 3 days
8. 14 days
9. 4 days after mexican invasion of France

i hope i understood all that i'm sorta tired right now.