Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Icelandic Battlefleet

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
unmerged(40512)

unmerged(40512)

Recruit
Feb 23, 2005
5
0
I just saw your having Iceland in this game.

Are you involving the Icelandic patrol ships in it too as well as the Keflavík military base?

Icelandic navy as in shipbucket:
FEThor1.png


FEAegir2.png
 
Cool :)

We'll have Iceland and the Keflavik airbase in the game, certainly.

We'll probably not include the coast guard vessels. These are really cool, and well suited for their purposes, but will be pretty useless in any naval combat scenario, and that's the only kind of scenario we really have!
 
Britain and the Netherlands are suing Iceland because it still refuses to pay us back the money it guaranteed to us in the financial crisis. I say we send up the Royal Navy (an actual battle fleet) and take those nice shiny coastguard ships as compensation. :p
 
I think somebody made a tabletop ruleset for Harpoon (the board game) for the cod war.

Very much outside the scope of what the NWAC engine is designed for, but maybe some clever souls can make one, by using the victory conditions in unusual ways? Hmm.
 
To the OP, I hope "Icelandic battle fleet" wasn't meant to be a serious description. The cod wars though, quite interesting from a political point of view, especially when the RN had the ability to sink the Icelandic fleet in hours but taking heavy action would have had NATO thrown off Iceland.
 
As a follow up to the OP, Iceland does't actually have a navy btw.
 
The Devs are doing a good job of hiding it, but they know that the real reason why they're leaving out the Icelandic fleet is because the game would be way too imbalanced with Iceland in it. Do you think the USN, RN, or Russian Fleet could stand up to being bombarded with cod, volcano dust and Bjork CDs? I don't.
 
FOARP said:
The Devs are doing a good job of hiding it, but they know that the real reason why they're leaving out the Icelandic fleet is because the game would be way too imbalanced with Iceland in it. Do you think the USN, RN, or Russian Fleet could stand up to being bombarded with cod, volcano dust and Bjork CDs? I don't.
Click to expand...

The new British frigates will be designed with on board CD scratchers to counter the Bjork CD threat. The current ships are being fitted with special frier's for the cod threat.
 
JanH said:
Cool :)

We'll have Iceland and the Keflavik airbase in the game, certainly.

We'll probably not include the coast guard vessels. These are really cool, and well suited for their purposes, but will be pretty useless in any naval combat scenario, and that's the only kind of scenario we really have!
Click to expand...

Nice to hear.
I remember playing old harpoon though, using fairly useless patrol ships as pickets for spotting subs mostly. Which was one of Icelands wartime role (unless there was a leftist government when the war happened, then nothing would have been done probably)


imperialman said:
To the OP, I hope "Icelandic battle fleet" wasn't meant to be a serious description. The cod wars though, quite interesting from a political point of view, especially when the RN had the ability to sink the Icelandic fleet in hours but taking heavy action would have had NATO thrown off Iceland.
Click to expand...

It would also have resulted in retaliation from Keflavík from some P3s, F4s etc

Back in the day, those old patrol ships were pretty good at giving the britsh frigates holes and shark-mouth-bows
 
bloddyaxe said:
It would also have resulted in retaliation from Keflavík from some P3s, F4s etc

Back in the day, those old patrol ships were pretty good at giving the britsh frigates holes and shark-mouth-bows
Click to expand...

I don't see how Iceland could retaliate. Iceland never operated P3's or F4's, NATO nations were the ones who used Keflavik (including Britain), not Iceland as Iceland had no standing airforce. Therefore it would clearly not result in retaliation as it is hard to believe that NATO would turn on Britain mid-cold war in a dispute over fish. To put it simply, short of throwing NATO off of Iceland, Iceland could do nothing about a British naval attack.

As for the patrol ships, if the British navy decided to actually fight, the Icelandic ships would have been destroyed pretty quickly. I know this wouldn't happen but hypotheticals are nice.
 
Last edited:
imperialman said:
Britain and the Netherlands are suing Iceland because it still refuses to pay us back the money it guaranteed to us in the financial crisis. I say we send up the Royal Navy (an actual battle fleet) and take those nice shiny coastguard ships as compensation. :p
Click to expand...

To be honest I think that is exactly the reason why Britain and Netherlands are so insistent on that money, strong prey on the weak. USA started the financial crisis, try to collect from them instead :D

Besides, Iceland doesn't need a dedicated navy, they have captain Sigurdur Petursson. God save those that attack this guy.
 
Xmasbeer said:
To be honest I think that is exactly the reason why Britain and Netherlands are so insistent on that money, strong prey on the weak. USA started the financial crisis, try to collect from them instead :D

Besides, Iceland doesn't need a dedicated navy, they have captain Sigurdur Petursson. God save those that attack this guy.
Click to expand...
The US didn't start it, President George W. Bush did by fighting two wars (one of them completely unnecessary) simultaneously without raising taxes. ;)
 
Xmasbeer said:
To be honest I think that is exactly the reason why Britain and Netherlands are so insistent on that money, strong prey on the weak. USA started the financial crisis, try to collect from them instead :D

Besides, Iceland doesn't need a dedicated navy, they have captain Sigurdur Petursson. God save those that attack this guy.
Click to expand...

It's a case of Iceland not paying back money it guaranteed it would, not the US. Strong vs weak is irrelevant. It's Iceland that owes the UK and Netherlands money, not the US. Countries can't pick and choose who they pay back. This is very divisive in Iceland though, the government want to pay back but the president won't sign the law. It seems very odd to say that it's strong vs weak, especially when Iceland are directly responsible.
 
Offtopic discussion for this subforum; please discuss the financial crisis and other offtopic stuff in the OT forum, thanks!
 
safferli said:
Offtopic discussion for this subforum; please discuss the financial crisis and other offtopic stuff in the OT forum, thanks!
Click to expand...

Fair enough, this thread's about dead anyway. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back