Historical check construction cost and maintenance/month cost

[Anavel Gato]

I feel like the economy of the latest patches are getting worse and worse, so I try to research and found out that, my Dreadnought II, 27k tons construction cost is $225,5 mil and maintenance cost is $20 mil/month. However, the average construction cost or early Dreadnought I and II (18k ~ 27k tons) is around $8,5 mil ~ $15 mil and "ANNUAL" maintenance cost is $8 mil.

Is this an attempt to stop nations to spam hundred of ships that will break the game? Or else, it's horrible when playing with too few ships on a BIG global map such as this. Or else, at least explain to me ... what kind of maintenance that cost $240 mil/ year PER SHIP? This ship maintenance a lone can build a WHOLE fleet in real life.

[FourGreenFields]

With how horrible the UI is, there's no such thing as "too few" ships on the map.

But more seriously, the game is riddled with issues, the cost of ships being ahistorical is honestly pretty minor as long as the game remains balanced.

[Anavel Gato]

Balance? AI can't even build ships when they are losing!

Most of their BB is around 15000 tons because it's TOO EXPENSIVE to go further and the whole economy collapse when they got blockaded

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3074607465

[vanDyck]

I actual tried to get a comparison of historical ship building cost and the game, but we dont know what the exchange course for the i.g. dollar is, and i wasnt able to get historic exchanges courses (dollar, pound, reichsmark), and only got my hands on building costs, no maintenance costs.

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by vanDyck:

I actual tried to get a comparison of historical ship building cost and the game, but we dont know what the exchange course for the i.g. dollar is, and i wasnt able to get historic exchanges courses (dollar, pound, reichsmark), and only got my hands on building costs, no maintenance costs.

In early of 20s century, common exchange rate £1 = $4,85. So, Dreadnough cost £1,783,000 = $8,643,550 (28 times lower than the ingame cost)

[hurepoix]

Historical comparaison for cost are pointless.
To know if economy is playable (that is diffirent of historically accurate), simply ask yourself ; Can I build less than the nation I play had at this era ? Most time answer is most often no ; I can build more than the nation I play owned at this era.

So can we complain ? Yes of course, we just need to be unfair or/and biaised.

Economy is not historically accurate, and it is assumed. If it was, game should be simply unplayable, especially for ''little countries''. Not only that, but game become a what if, at time you start it. It mostly to extend players s opportunities and add flexibility. It is why in my current campaign I was able to launch a 60 000 t BB in 1917 for exemple ; the kind of ship the nation I play never owned, even not during the WWII.

[vanDyck]

The post WWI - treaties limited ship sized to 1.500-1750t DDs, 10.000t (and 8" guns) cruisers and 35.000t-45.000t (and 16" guns) BBs (or capital ships, as BBs and BCs were not seperated). Germany had even harsher limits (6000t cruiser with 6" guns, 10000t BBs with 11" guns).
The limitations (included a max tonnage for the fleet) were importand as after WWI USA, GB, Japan and Italy and France started a new naval arms race, while almost all were broke, had a economy crisis or couldnt afford bigger ships, so the limitations were mostly accepted. GB even wanted around 25000t and around 12" later on... and a limitation of 14" were thought off, but stopped after japan left the treaties. (so the KGV-class had "only" 14" guns).
Of course the ship building industry was able to build bigger ships. At the end of WWI bigger ships were planned, like the L20 e alpha, G3 (45.000-55.000t) and even 20" guns development was started. But i think around 50.000t and 16" is a sense making technical limit, bigger guns tend to damage your own ship, and the costs get too high so the few shios you can afford would be to precious to use.
Most late ACRs were bigger then 10.000t. So bigger then 10.000t cruisers would be a problem either.

This is not a multiplayer game, where balancing matters. If you choose to play a "small" major nation, then its up to you to live with the limitations. This is maybe the only challenge the game has to offer as otherwise the AI is not a match overal for a player that knows what to do.
To my opinion china and spain shouldnt be major naval powers at all. Even Russia is maybe argueable as they almost never were able to build their capital ships without foreign help until after WWII.
Economy should represent a countries possiblities and somewhat be historic accurate. Dont need to be the exact in numbers, but the relations should be right. The main problem is we get bonus in a %-growing system for the gouvernment type, and we never have crisis and shrinking economy, even during war, and no war-debt system. Also political tendencies like isolianistic USA, and geographical situation + having colonies or not doesnt influnce the naval budget.

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by hurepoix:

Historical comparaison for cost are pointless.
To know if economy is playable (that is diffirent of historically accurate), simply ask yourself ; Can I build less than the nation I play had at this era ? Most time answer is most often no ; I can build more than the nation I play owned at this era.

So can we complain ? Yes of course, we just need to be unfair or/and biaised.

Economy is not historically accurate, and it is assumed. If it was, game should be simply unplayable, especially for ''little countries''. Not only that, but game become a what if, at time you start it. It mostly to extend players s opportunities and add flexibility. It is why in my current campaign I was able to launch a 60 000 t BB in 1917 for exemple ; the kind of ship the nation I play never owned, even not during the WWII.

Again, you miss the point that economy imbalance makes AI nations OUT OF SHIPS. Can you just think about the gameplay?

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by vanDyck:

The post WWI - treaties limited ship sized to 1.500-1750t DDs, 10.000t (and 8" guns) cruisers and 35.000t-45.000t (and 16" guns) BBs (or capital ships, as BBs and BCs were not seperated). Germany had even harsher limits (6000t cruiser with 6" guns, 10000t BBs with 11" guns).
The limitations (included a max tonnage for the fleet) were importand as after WWI USA, GB, Japan and Italy and France started a new naval arms race, while almost all were broke, had a economy crisis or couldnt afford bigger ships, so the limitations were mostly accepted. GB even wanted around 25000t and around 12" later on... and a limitation of 14" were thought off, but stopped after japan left the treaties. (so the KGV-class had "only" 14" guns).
Of course the ship building industry was able to build bigger ships. At the end of WWI bigger ships were planned, like the L20 e alpha, G3 (45.000-55.000t) and even 20" guns development was started. But i think around 50.000t and 16" is a sense making technical limit, bigger guns tend to damage your own ship, and the costs get too high so the few shios you can afford would be to precious to use.
Most late ACRs were bigger then 10.000t. So bigger then 10.000t cruisers would be a problem either.

This is not a multiplayer game, where balancing matters. If you choose to play a "small" major nation, then its up to you to live with the limitations. This is maybe the only challenge the game has to offer as otherwise the AI is not a match overal for a player that knows what to do.
To my opinion china and spain shouldnt be major naval powers at all. Even Russia is maybe argueable as they almost never were able to build their capital ships without foreign help until after WWII.
Economy should represent a countries possiblities and somewhat be historic accurate. Dont need to be the exact in numbers, but the relations should be right. The main problem is we get bonus in a %-growing system for the gouvernment type, and we never have crisis and shrinking economy, even during war, and no war-debt system. Also political tendencies like isolianistic USA, and geographical situation + having colonies or not doesnt influnce the naval budget.

This is single player game like Total War where economy and fleet size MATTER. Today, 2 major nation in my game RAN out of Ship. What I am playing with is a boring campaign with NO ENEMY. That's 100% gamebreaking bug in my book.

[hurepoix]

Originally posted by Anavel Gato:

Again, you miss the point that economy imbalance makes AI nations OUT OF SHIPS. Can you just think about the gameplay?

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3075405652

So explain me that ; it is in 1926 start in 1890. France have not much ships because I sunk most of its fleet. 1 000 billions of cash flow. Some countries litteraly vomit money and cant spend it. Other nations have and always had a fair number of ships.
The only constructive advice I can give you, is, may be, you should try to play the game, avoiding to start at the lowest difficulty setting possible.

Nota ; usually the bugs are located between the chair, and the display screen. ;-)

[gigamelon1981]

Originally posted by Anavel Gato:

my Dreadnought II, 27k tons construction cost is $225,5 mil and maintenance cost is $20 mil/month. However, the average construction cost or early Dreadnought I and II (18k ~ 27k tons) is around $8,5 mil ~ $15 mil and "ANNUAL" maintenance cost is $8 mil.

Is this only the hull or the finished product?

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by gigamelon1981:

Originally posted by Anavel Gato:

my Dreadnought II, 27k tons construction cost is $225,5 mil and maintenance cost is $20 mil/month. However, the average construction cost or early Dreadnought I and II (18k ~ 27k tons) is around $8,5 mil ~ $15 mil and "ANNUAL" maintenance cost is $8 mil.

Is this only the hull or the finished product?

Finished and fully operation ships

[hurepoix]

if it can be usefull for someone Bismark cost was around 200 millions reichmark. It iseems to be equivalent to about 4.5 billions current US Dollars.
I think it is also about the cost of such ship build in game around 1939.

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by hurepoix:

if it can be usefull for someone Bismark cost was around 200 millions reichmark. It iseems to be equivalent to about 4.5 billions current US Dollars.
I think it is also about the cost of such ship build in game around 1939.

Zzzz... 1939 is LATE game. Do you need to wait 40 years in a world without warship? AI couldn't even build ship because it's too expensive compare to their tiny economy. 40 years

[hurepoix]

In your game may be, for a reason unkown to me.

What I can say about my current game, is I was able to built my fleet correctly, accordying my shipyards capacities and my budget. I started at legendary, so despite I played Deutschland, I have been the game s tramp for 30 years. Even as the poorest, I was able, at time dreadnought become available to have the task forces I needed in early game. it means about 15 BB 24-30 CA/CL and 50-60 DD on the 1897-1917 era. I add to be cautious with money during the era 1910-1920, before to seize richs territories from top dogs in the early 20's.
Ennemies on an other hand seem to never had problem with money and production. Worst, France, for exemple, at war with everyone (I worked hard for it happens), Lose tons of transports each turn, but was constantly at 100% logistic anyway.

I start my game with the current release upgraded in x2 then X3.

Possibly your problem can come from the fact, war raged so much between AI in your game, that it ruined countries, Or may be you play at normal difficulty setting.

I feel this game is from the generation ; ''Player must always win''. I 'm not sure it is possible to be wiped out from the map by AI at that game, even not at legendary. You have however to be warned you will not start in historical condition, but start a race with lead shoes.

It is only when I will start a new campaign, I will be able to determine if I play currently in an exceptionnal situation, or not.

[Anavel Gato]

Originally posted by hurepoix:

In your game may be, for a reason unkown to me.

What I can say about my current game, is I was able to built my fleet correctly, accordying my shipyards capacities and my budget. I started at legendary, so despite I played Deutschland, I have been the game s tramp for 30 years. Even as the poorest, I was able, at time dreadnought become available to have the task forces I needed in early game. it means about 15 BB 24-30 CA/CL and 50-60 DD on the 1897-1917 era. I add to be cautious with money during the era 1910-1920, before to seize richs territories from top dogs in the early 20's.
Ennemies on an other hand seem to never had problem with money and production. Worst, France, for exemple, at war with everyone (I worked hard for it happens), Lose tons of transports each turn, but was constantly at 100% logistic anyway.

I start my game with the current release upgraded in x2 then X3.

Possibly your problem can come from the fact, war raged so much between AI in your game, that it ruined countries, Or may be you play at normal difficulty setting.

I feel this game is from the generation ; ''Player must always win''. I 'm not sure it is possible to be wiped out from the map by AI at that game, even not at legendary. You have however to be warned you will not start in historical condition, but start a race with lead shoes.

It is only when I will start a new campaign, I will be able to determine if I play currently in an exceptionnal situation, or not.

"war raged so much between AI in your game, that it ruined countries, Or may be you play at normal difficulty setting"

I don't want to answer to your comment when you didn't even on the same page, why bothering pointed out normal setting when Legendary is the required setting for testing the boundary? If War raged so much and AI nation can't build ship for 2 years, it's a problem with the game.