Prev: Re: Campaigns Next: Re: Campaigns

RE: Campaigns

From: "Robertson, Brendan" <Brendan.Robertson@d...>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 10:50:11 +1000
Subject: RE: Campaigns

On Friday, August 24, 2001 10:18 AM, Laserlight
[SMTP:laserlight@quixnet.net] wrote:
> 
> 
> > That could make a very good way to represent crew experience:
> > Untrained: -3 CF, 6 months training to make Green
> 
> Hm, might be a little rough on a frigate or DD with only a couple of
> crew to start
Having a larger crew gives a greater margin of error.  If you want good
crews on DDs, you're going to have to rotate them off your SDs/BBs which
would have large training sections for new crew anyway.
As an example, HH spent her first tour aboard an SDN as an ensign before
promoting to a LAC as a Lt. for further training until finally getting
her
own first DD as a commander.
Untrained civilian becoming Green crew is normally part of your
pre-deployment training (or should be, anyway) if you have a decent
program
in place.
If a campaign wanted to get that involved in crew management, you need
to
pay your training costs 6 months in advance or pay the penalty when you
suffer heavy losses or big shipbuilding projects.  
For most campaigns, you would presume the crews are already at Green
status
when assigned to your newly completed ship.

> 
> > Wargames double the maintainance cost of a ship for a turn (or other
> > appropriate costs under the campaign rules used)
> 
> Probably double for ships not in combat--more like x10 for ships that
> actually fight this turn, I'd think.
Combat operations should be part of normal supply etc and would be taken
into account in post battle repair costs.  It's more there should be
some
sort of peacetime/non-operational cost for the live-fire exercises
required
(what government want's to spend money on shooting at dummy targets?)

Neath Southern Skies -http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu


Prev: Re: Campaigns Next: Re: Campaigns