CNRP OOC Thread

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

If things don't go as planned, I expect Triyun to hold a gun to MGL's guy's head and yell out, "I'm about to bust a McNutt in here."

[Yawoo]

Apologies, but my post will be up on Monday instead of tonight as I need to clarify something with a certain sleepy Dutchman. 

[MostGloriousLeader]

Hurry!  Or imma gonna start auto-autoadvancing stuff around here :P

[TheShammySocialist]

Apologies, but my post will be up on Monday instead of tonight as I need to clarify something with a certain sleepy Dutchman. 

 

Thanks for clarifying Yawoo.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/119485-the-window-to-america/?p=3227487

 

First, the Albertan Dominion ceased to exist as a legal person. So whatever "joint" ownership you want to protect is gone.

 

Second, I RPed my intelligence gathering efforts in a way that by all means is legal and as long as you don't deport people for photographing the landscape every now and then or looking at their surroundings, your FBI won't be doing much. If at all, you'd operate on the principle that every Japanese in the area is a spy, monitoring hundreds of people doing their everyday work. This isn't some grand espionage scheme, however it is intelligence and you'll have to live with it.

[Triyun]

For god sake Eva and MGL.  Stop!  This isn't the economic era of Louis XIV.  Quit being douche bags and go read some modern keynesian economics and get the protectionist mercantalist bones out of your ass holes.  Is like you've both been educated by the Texas School Board.  Jesus.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Well, I'm investing in other countries, in the hopes it helps relations and my economy. But someone has to go and throw protectionist barriers at me at every corner. Guess that apart from being able to shoot each other, MGL and I are in a cold war.

[Centurius]

Just as a general notice to everyone, due to some things going wrong in my personal life I haven't been on-line much the last few days. I am hoping I can make a full return tomorrow and will then respond to my ongoing threads and the war.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Well, good luck with whatever it is.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

Well, I'm investing in other countries, in the hopes it helps relations and my economy. But someone has to go and throw protectionist barriers at me at every corner.

Remember what America did last time the japanese got a bit grabby for land?

Guess that apart from being able to shoot each other, MGL and I are in a cold war.

Eva, you aren't in a cold war until you and MGL are starting proxy wars in Southeast Asia and some banana republics.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Remember what America did last time the japanese got a bit grabby for land?

He certainly can try.

[Mogar]

if you keep at it triyun will let him, and Cent i hope everything gets fixed shortly, feel free to come chat if you want, i am always here for all of you.

[TheShammySocialist]

No worries Cent, you're not the only one that's found himself in that kind of rut during this conflict. Take the time you need.

 

I'm entertaining myself with lots of popcorn and spiked slushies watching this petty spat between America and Japan, anyways. ;)

Edited February 10, 2014 by TheShammySocialist

[Triyun]

Well, I'm investing in other countries, in the hopes it helps relations and my economy. But someone has to go and throw protectionist barriers at me at every corner. Guess that apart from being able to shoot each other, MGL and I are in a cold war.

More like a cod war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars

[PresidentDavid]

Fulfill your civic duty as citizens of Iceland and loyal subjects of the King and vote :D 

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/120575-first-elections-in-iceland-althing-election/

[Yawoo]

I have a few issues for all you warriors.

 

Shammy, I think you are confused about the nature of my defensive lines. I’m not using a static line approach ala WWI. Certainly, there are units which have dug in and fortified, but by no means am I using unmovable fortifications. Let’s talk before respond to your land based attacks – feel free to shoot me a PM, or reply here.

 

Vekt, you just launched over 1200 missiles in your most recent post.  To keep things reasonable, that’s going to exhaust your on hand stockpile unless you can link me to a post where you have set aside more than that number at the appropriate launch sites. I would imagine if you want to move ahead with that type of launch it would take a bit of time to re-arm yourself. Please let me know what's up so I can respond appropriately.

 

My post is ready bar these two issues - I can post what's ready while we work things out, or I can wait until everything is solved. Let me know what you wish, oh opponents of mine. 

[TheShammySocialist]

Woo to the woo! I'm not entirely confused by the nature of your defensive lines. I'll give you what my perspective is, from what I've read, and you can correct my thinking if its needed, that way we're both on the same page and everything is all handy dandy.

 

From what I understand, you aren't employing WWI static defense tactics, that much is clear, but from what I understand, its basically a big scheme that falls under the auspices of a doctrine of "delaying actions". Basically, being a menace, employing widespread outposts and detachments, which seem to be dug in, maybe some that are mobile in an attempt to trade small amounts of blood or otherwise for time to build a counterattack. This is also coupled with a strategy of blowing bridges and causing delays, as well as, most recently, deploying minefields. Basically all tactics that try to slow down, maybe not completely stop maneuver warfare from happening.

 

You're not employing a solid front strategy like in WWI, neither am I, and if you need clarification on how I am employing my troops and how they are advancing, please feel free to ask. I'd be quite willing to explain it in detail to you or anyone really.

 

Now from what I understand, most of your support (artillery, anti-air, etc.) equipment itself is in fortified positions, that's the feeling I'm getting from your posts.

 

If you're using mobile blocking detachments, I'm not sure where I've seen you post about it, so please post that to me in response. I know you mentioned something about panzergrenadier-style troops mobilizing (about a regiment's sized force, IIRC), but I wasn't sure if they had joined the battle, so I waved off responding to it until I knew for sure they had entered the battle. From what I understand, you haven't really launched any counterattacks, just tried to rely on blocking detachments and hampering maneuver warfare. Whilst that could be beneficial in some parts of the areas we are fighting in (mostly towards the Carpathians), the paths I chose for the major maneuver forces to advance along are not conducive with this type of operational doctrine, they're deliberately avoiding terrain where they could find issue with advancing across. I chose not to advance into East Prussia (towards Konigsberg), through the lakes area, instead deliberately hitting north of that region, the Russians learned their lesson advancing through that area, I believe, in WWI.

 

Counter to this, I am running a style of my attacks is basically a counter that works against both static outpost style defenses and one that utilizes mobile blocking detachments. Basically the Polish Land Forces are built on an offensive style where you have some centralized control, but battlefield commanders are issued orders that have clear objectives, but give a chance for them to interpret them on how to accomplish them, its basically one huge fluid battle. Moreover, they also are encouraged to always exploit opportunities when they think they have a chance to secure other objectives in the course of their mission. The doctrine is based on the German style of tactical and operational employment of forces during the Second World War, with a 'hint' of Finnish tactics in the same time period, basically giving tactical commanders a lot of freedom, but not so much (too much freedom, and not enough centralized control became a problem that plagued the Finns in '44) that it is detrimental to centralized control and operational objectives and overall strategy.

 

So please feel free to correct my thinking if need be, I'm open to constructive criticism as always, and as we all know, we can all get 'lost in translation' in our posts.

 

On a separate note, I'd like to make a clarification that I believe Poland has more assured aerial superiority (bar of course anti-air defenses) East of Danzig at the moment, due to damage to Prussia's air base network in this region. I'm not contesting the ability to fight in the air effectively west of Danzig, but given the damage to Prussia's air base network, and the fact that you have to basically dispatch fighters all the way from the west towards areas like Konigsberg, Poland has the advantage in that region in the air, at this point.

[Yawoo]

Woo to the woo! I'm not entirely confused by the nature of your defensive lines. I'll give you what my perspective is, from what I've read, and you can correct my thinking if its needed, that way we're both on the same page and everything is all handy dandy.

 

From what I understand, you aren't employing WWI static defense tactics, that much is clear, but from what I understand, its basically a big scheme that falls under the auspices of a doctrine of "delaying actions". Basically, being a menace, employing widespread outposts and detachments, which seem to be dug in, maybe some that are mobile in an attempt to trade small amounts of blood or otherwise for time to build a counterattack. This is also coupled with a strategy of blowing bridges and causing delays, as well as, most recently, deploying minefields. Basically all tactics that try to slow down, maybe not completely stop maneuver warfare from happening.

 

You're not employing a solid front strategy like in WWI, neither am I, and if you need clarification on how I am employing my troops and how they are advancing, please feel free to ask. I'd be quite willing to explain it in detail to you or anyone really.

 

Now from what I understand, most of your support (artillery, anti-air, etc.) equipment itself is in fortified positions, that's the feeling I'm getting from your posts.

 

If you're using mobile blocking detachments, I'm not sure where I've seen you post about it, so please post that to me in response. I know you mentioned something about panzergrenadier-style troops mobilizing (about a regiment's sized force, IIRC), but I wasn't sure if they had joined the battle, so I waved off responding to it until I knew for sure they had entered the battle. From what I understand, you haven't really launched any counterattacks, just tried to rely on blocking detachments and hampering maneuver warfare. Whilst that could be beneficial in some parts of the areas we are fighting in (mostly towards the Carpathians), the paths I chose for the major maneuver forces to advance along are not conducive with this type of operational doctrine, they're deliberately avoiding terrain where they could find issue with advancing across. I chose not to advance into East Prussia (towards Konigsberg), through the lakes area, instead deliberately hitting north of that region, the Russians learned their lesson advancing through that area, I believe, in WWI.

 

Counter to this, I am running a style of my attacks is basically a counter that works against both static outpost style defenses and one that utilizes mobile blocking detachments. Basically the Polish Land Forces are built on an offensive style where you have some centralized control, but battlefield commanders are issued orders that have clear objectives, but give a chance for them to interpret them on how to accomplish them, its basically one huge fluid battle. Moreover, they also are encouraged to always exploit opportunities when they think they have a chance to secure other objectives in the course of their mission. The doctrine is based on the German style of tactical and operational employment of forces during the Second World War, with a 'hint' of Finnish tactics in the same time period, basically giving tactical commanders a lot of freedom, but not so much (too much freedom, and not enough centralized control became a problem that plagued the Finns in '44) that it is detrimental to centralized control and operational objectives and overall strategy.

 

So please feel free to correct my thinking if need be, I'm open to constructive criticism as always, and as we all know, we can all get 'lost in translation' in our posts.

 

On a separate note, I'd like to make a clarification that I believe Poland has more assured aerial superiority (bar of course anti-air defenses) East of Danzig at the moment, due to damage to Prussia's air base network in this region. I'm not contesting the ability to fight in the air effectively west of Danzig, but given the damage to Prussia's air base network, and the fact that you have to basically dispatch fighters all the way from the west towards areas like Konigsberg, Poland has the advantage in that region in the air, at this point.

 

For the most part you are correct, but I'll clarify for my own benefit if nothing else. Certainly, some elements have been forced to dig in and fortify themselves, and are mostly what you have posted (ie. anti-air, long range artillery, etc.). This is not to say, however that they are not immobile, they can and will respond to your troops - generally via the more mobile units that have organized themselves near the dug in units. The main delaying tactics were just to buy some time for the army to organize their forces to respond to the invasion, which by now it has achieved across the east, so you can expect a more fluid environment moving forward (which was hinted at in my previous post in terms of Silesia). 

 

To clarify on the East Prussian matter, it looks like I misread where your border was with Russia - I thought that little notch you have near Goldapp was actually lower on the map I use of Prussia, which is why I utilized the lakes region in my previous post. Which makes sense now based on your post. Now, in terms of air power - I've tried to make if fairly clear that you have the upper hand in the east, if this hasn't been adequately broadcast I apologize. I wouldn't say you have complete air superiority, however, as even though I have to pull in extra forces from the west I still have enough in the east to provide some contest to your units, however ineffective that may prove. I appreciate the explanation, I think that clarifies everything for me, but before I post let me know if what I posted here makes sense for you, also, smack Vektor for not responding.  

[TheShammySocialist]

Everything seems to make sense, although whether or not my understanding will be needed is unclear depending on what happens at the UNSC.

 

Counter to Prusso-Germanic customs, we typically don't beat our allies for being tardy on responding to RFIs.

Edited February 12, 2014 by TheShammySocialist

[Yawoo]

Well, the UNSC actually brings up new questions on my part. Did you want the ceasefire to be observed as a non-post on my part until such a time as that is resolved (as this looks to be what my allies are doing)?  Also, beating allies is a required practice for all Germanic peoples. 

Edited February 13, 2014 by Yawoo

[TheShammySocialist]

I'd say that's a fair assumption.

[Markus Wilding]

Apologies to anyone who may be waiting on a post from me. Triple research papers are kicking my ass right now.

[Yawoo]

I will be pretty inactive the remainder of this week. Should you require my services, please shoot me a PM. On the off chance you are thinking of nominating me for GM, I pass due to RL constraints on my time. 

[Triyun]

Will respond tomorrow to everyone sorry for the delay.

[Horo the Wise Wolf]

CNRP has slowed to a crawl! :P

Edited February 24, 2014 by Horo the Wise Wolf