[MaHuJa]

I think the biggest problem in the "technology equation" may be the thinking that winning the war entails sinking the other nation's military naval assets - ignoring the effect on economics a war at sea can have. The economy is the lifeblood of a nation - and fairly critical to a war effort.

I'll put my suggestions for concrete backstories in italics.

Originally Posted by Deathblow

1. Russian vs US Mutiny pits navies at odds. Good fun and good matchups. The DW bread and butter.

What about the US having the mutiny? I know there was a scenario US vs US about this, but it was treating it like only a joke.

(Or both - see supreme ruler 2010 backstory)

3. US versus Iran Very, very, very plausible circumstances. Fun to play though the techonology mis-match makes the missions somewhat of a turkey shoot. (except the occasional kilo vs SSN)

So long as the US resources are in the theater. Real world, they makes sure it always is. But let's say something had them (say, minus one frigate and one tico, plus heloes) drawn away. (India, pakistan going at it?) What would a week or so (before the US is back in sufficient force) of choking oil supplies do? That's the players job to prevent. Versus the whole Iranian navy, with plenty civilians around that need protection. Poor guy.

With western economy in a downturn already, a skirmish between India and Pakistan flared up into something bigger; increasing the economic problems already existing. This conflict, with its potential to go nuclear, caught the attention of most of the world, and the US was the ones best placed to respond. Doing that however, required stripping the region of other forces. When the US arrived with 2 Carriers and a whole lot of other ships, they managed to contain the situation, but while they started with that, Iran decided this was their chance to hurt the US the most. A blockade of all oil-exporting ships (except their own, of course) began, trying to inflate the prices of oil immensely, and bring western economy grinding to an absolute halt.

4. French vs US FERdeBOER's campaign, fun and enjoyable. A real plausible conflict? Ha, probably not, but its fun to play around, given that the technology matchup is "reasonably" comparable enough in regards to weapons and platforms.

Europe vs US?
What possible unearthly mishap could spark a Europe vs US war? Hard to think of one that's not either 50 years in the future,

And therefore the current platforms would likely be outdated - weren't nukesubs supposed to live for 30 years?

or so extremely dramatic it represents pure absurdity (George Bush orders the assination of Tony Blair ). Still, it would be a good techology matchup with comparable SSN, SSK, weapons, etc, and could introduce missions to the US coastline, but would be story really make sense?.... maybe as an alternative universe... perhaps an "if the Germans had won" universe?... :hmm:

I don't know what would cause a rift deep enough, other than practice. As for stretch-backgrounds, perhaps the US was "taken over" by the **AAs who don't like consumer-friendly laws enacted (though these may need to be invented?) in the EU? They're allowed to crusade against their own, so why not against foreigners? Oh wait, this could cost the national budget directly, scratch that.

NorthKorea vs US?
A plausible conflict but the technology mismatch is sooooo lopsided that would it really be any fun to play? Some possible Kilo hunts if NorthKorea were to acquire Kilos... most everything else might just be a turkey shoot.

NK is a threat, but that's pretty much "quantity is a quality of its own" ON LAND. The naval part is more like an afterthought, other than as a source of missiles and area for floating airbases. Oh, and, NK has supposedly already been doing commando insertions from sea against the south.

Europe vs Russia revisited?

With the US staying out, or the US getting involved?

Either way, the naval war strategy of the russians in such a conflict would likely be similar to the one the germans used in ww2 - keep US reinforcements from reaching the land battlefields.

even a strecthed imagination with the LA as a T-boat and the Kilo as some German Type 212? Too much of a stretch? You decide.

Been smoking mushrooms or the like lately?

China vs Japan?
These two countries still hate in other right? Japan has absolutely loathed military conflict ever since the second WW (afaik)

The occupational regime put in place a constitution essentially forbidding having armed forces to begin with. As the cold war came to be, that was changed into having armed forces but the constitution disallowing their use except for self defense. A couple years back, there was talk about giving provisions for special cases, participating in UN missions or the like.

so if would take one of the sides acting against their current stance to motivate the conflict (China being stupidly aggressive or Japan reversing its maritime policies over the last 50 years)... but still, Japan has some good naval units that maybe fun to see in action

Most of which aren't in DW
(Though that may be about submarines)

Perhaps the Chinese side represented as Kilos and Akula's bought from Russia.

The subs they have can be bad enough, given proper use. If the Han, too noisy for success against capable ASW assets, (at least in DW) began hit-and-run against shipping to Japan, keeping away from protected convoys (as determined by other intelligence) then it might be a decisive factor.

Still, the problem persist as in the Russia vs Europe with the Japanese side only being represented from an American ally perspective. Still, perhaps if the LA were really a top secret SSN that Japan has never revealed? The FFG as one of the older Japanese ASW destroyers? Again it would take some streching, but if we ever got desperate for scenarios...

In a war against china, the US would probably be just happy at a chance to take part, if they could do so with some claim to legitimacy. Considering what we could call the "china doctrine" (china IS the ones with the greatest chance of becoming a second superpower, an event the US has decided it will not allow)

Russia vs China?
That would probably be like US versus Canada. Why on earth.....?

Except the force disparity between Ru/Ch is much less than US/Ca - unless Canada has been misrepresented in DW? (I think they've been rather dependent on the US, a close ally, for defense)

The rest has been covered by another.

US vs Third World Counties?

You mean... trying to reflect the real world situation in DW? :P

Attack of the fishing boats! Sweet! But seriously, would there really be any point of trying to script a plot outta this that wouldn't be a total technology mismatch.

Again, economics. Such a thing would likely be done through economic means, (all those countries put up a trade embargo with the US) and probably responded to with covert ops (think assassination teams) all over the world. (I mean, the US are experienced at that!)

As such, I suspect seal insertion and recovery missions would provide the majority of mission objectives.



Generally, sea power is usable for only four things:
-Disrupting sea trade
-Ensuring safe passage of troops across water
-Naval bombardment; guns or missiles both
-Base for air power


Engaging enemy naval forces is just a means to prevent the enemy from doing those things.